What if??

History is full of second guessing.  Mistakes in the Super bowl, NASCAR, etc and all our major conflicts.  Currently most thinking people are critical over Obama’s handling of the ISIS crisis.  Our liberal journalists are outraged and demanding justice for the two reporters beheaded on UTube.  Lets first stop right there and ask, is this grounds for the US to declare war?  If so, does this mean the US government is now guaranteeing  the safety of all American journalists that enter war zones?  Is it tied to human rights and what the UN will rule on how people are treated?  If so then I think we will be limited to declaring war on Israel or ourselves.  Everyone else seems to get free passes for some reason.

Back to our history, did our media force the US to declare war on Spain?  I feel for the families of the reporters and agree it was/is horrible beyond words.  But so too were the thousands or tens of thousands raped, brutalized and killed by ISIS.  Is our reason for entering this conflict the reporters or to protect human rights?  How many other conflicts have we ignored?  Is it because ISIS has declared war on  America?  Didn’t the terrorists in Nigeria also declare war on us after kidnapping those school girls?

The latest outcry by FOX & the Repug’s is that Obama has had intelligence on ISIS for over a year.  Why has it taken him so long to act?  Might be a fair question, but if so, then when do the questioners think he should have acted and what is their justification?  A year ago they were rebels fighting the regime in Syria we would like to see overthrown.  It is possible we supplied them with weapons.  There are also reports the Saudi’s and other ME powers supported ISIS.  So a year ago, all the Obama critics would have supported his actions at that time.

Then they invaded Iraq.  Should we have immediately jumped back into that hornets nest?  I can agree with the critics that Obama did not try very hard if all to secure a balance of forces agreement which was part of the excuse for our pull-out of Iraq.  With the corrupt president they elected, is that a realistic expectation?  The military we rebuild has fallen apart due to blatant corruption of their democratically elected government.  At what point does it become our duty or right to step into this conflict.  And if we do, who’s side are we even on?  Obama took us into Libya.  A dictator was disposed and murdered.  No tears from me, but how are things in Libya today?  Ongoing civil war with militant Islamic’s   gaining enough power that Egypt had to step in with military strikes.

Slowly, oh so slowly, Obama finished his last vacation, got in the last golf games and has returned to deal with this crisis.  The world did not end while he was away.  Many innocents did die, but that doesn’t mean he could have saved them.  But now he’s acting.  And I find myself asking myself an unthinkable question, what if Obama was right?  Only on this, on responding to ISIS/ISIL.  He is meeting with NATO, bringing them in.  He is meeting with several Middle East powers that want us to act.  If the world wants us to enter this conflict, what are they committing to the conflict?  Before we put boots on that ground again, I want to see Jordan, the Saudi’s and other players put their people where their mouths are, in the front lines, in front of our troops.  And all these war mongering journalists, I’d like to see them right there with them…


  1. Obama isn’t responsible for everything. A terrorist group as violent and extremist as ISIS never would have been created if the U.S. hadn’t invaded Iraq and completely destabilized the region (not that it was very stable before we got there). So isn’t his fault that they’ve become so powerful. If we listened to FOX News and the war-hungry conservatives, we’d be invading practically every country. They’d drag us into every foreign military conflict. They’ve gotten us into plenty of pointless wars such as in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan that hasn’t benefited us. Those wars only weakened our economy and wasted tons of military personnel. We can’t just go bombing anyone that condemns us. Militant groups hating our country doesn’t justify U.S. imperialism. Its obvious that ISIS must be dealt with, but we can’t allow ourselves to get wrapped up in yet another never-ending, unwinnable war.

    • Obscureecho,
      WordPress kicked you into moderation. Sorry if I was slow to respond. I would not make the claim Obama is responsible for ISIS. I will say he has helped their growth thru several actions he has taken.

    • Mostly agree but this “Arab Spring” thing, the destruction of Qaddafi, the undermining of the Egyptian Government and the insane effort to get rid of Assad are a bigger and more proximate part. Hey, a few months ago, before Russia put on the brakes, we were hot to trot to arm “freedom fighters” like ISIS.

    • Obama is responsible for arming and funding the Syrian Freedom Fighters, whom ISIS morphed from. ISIS moved from Syria, where they were not faring well, into Iraq and now we have all these claims of human rights violations, genocide, rape, murder etc. The pundits are claiming that ISIS must be attacked IN SYRIA, where Obama wanted to attack earlier after HIS Freedom Fighters used chemical weapons against civilians in an attempted False Flag to bomb Syria and hasten the removal of Assad. We are right back to where we were when Obama wanted to bomb Syria. The pushback is coming from the alternative media who know full well ISIS is doing Obama’s bidding so as to get support to bomb Syria.

      This has nothing to do with Bush, he is out of office and has been throughout all of this. Obama, is just like Bush, just following the orders of his puppet masters. The puppet masters can’t control the information flow or the propaganda anymore, so, they need something totally evil to get the support for more wars. It’s not working. 😉

      • “This has nothing to do with Bush, he is out of office and has been throughout all of this”

        Absolutely it has to do with Bush. He started the mess. Indeed, he organized a specific policy of disintegration of the Iraqi State into Sunni, Shite, and Kurds.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          Which would be a good thing under your philosophy, would it not?


          Don’t force groups to integrate if they do not wish to.

          Curious whether your use of “specific” is synonymous with “deliberate” in the way you used it.

          • JAC

            It is always better to reduce the centralization of legitimized violence out of the hands of the few upon the masses, into the hands of many. This increases the number of choices for the victims to choose under which tyranny they wish to subject themselves, which increases the competition between violent providers to attract those subjects.

            As will all increases in competition, it improves the condition of the common man.

            • Just A Citizen says:


              Did I get that right! You are claiming that diversified TYRANNY will improve the condition of common man??

              I think what you are trying to say is that the smaller the tyrannical govt the greater the chance the people have of throwing off the tyrant.

              • JAC
                “Did I get that right! You are claiming that diversified TYRANNY will improve the condition of common man??”

                Correct, and all the way down to the indivisible individual, a tyranny of one upon himself, would be the ultimate improvement upon the common man.

                “I think what you are trying to say is that the smaller the tyrannical govt the greater the chance the people have of throwing off the tyrant.”

                Which merely disintegrates that down to a smaller, and smaller size until it cannot get smaller then the individual.

                Read Thoreau, old man. 🙂

            • Just A Citizen says:


              Forgot……..how about you directly answer my question about deliberate vs. specific, relative to Bush.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      While your general reaction that we should not be engaged, the details of your arguments have serious flaws. They in fact have little to do with why we should or should not engage in actions anywhere.

      1. ISIS is an off shoot of the belief system pushed by Al Queda and many other smaller factions. There is no proof nor can you prove that they would not exist if we had not invaded Iraq. The only question is whether they would have been able to successfully invade Iraq if Saddam had remained in power.

      Furthermore, our invasion of Iraq did not destabilize the region. It destabilized Iraq.

      As SK noted, the Arab Spring may have more to do with their creation and gain of power. Here is the conundrum for those who love to blame Bush for everything. You claim Iraq destabilized the ME but then praise the Arab Spring, but per your claim, would that have happened without the US upending the apple cart in the Middle East?

      2. Fox is Fox as are the war mongers. However, if you listen to MSNBC, the MSM and the leftists we would be waging war everywhere as well. You see the only difference among them seems to be the WHERE they think we should bomb people. Try to think back to how many times the Dems or left have called for military action in various African countries.

      And it was Mr. Clinton who bombed in Africa and the Slav states. Me thinks your opposition is more based on political party than principle. If I am wrong then you should explain the principle.

      3. Are you claiming it was the Conservatives that waged war in Viet Nam? Ever hear of Lyndon Baines Johnson…………..Progressive Democrat?

      4. I agree we cannot bomb people for just condemning us. Afghanistan did far more than just condemn us, if you recall.

      5. I suggest you not throw the “imperialism” word around so willy nilly. Our invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq are not moves of an Imperialist Nation. It that were so we would have stayed and taken complete control. The constant use of Imperialistic to describe the USA does a disservice to the truly Imperialistic nations of history. We certainly do exercise a hegemonic power. But until recently so did the Soviet Union.

      6. Why does ISIS need to be dealt with? At least from the USA perspective. I agree we don’t and shouldn’t get pulled into things that are not beneficial to us.

      However, I also think folks need to wake up to the fact we are engaged in a never ending war at this point. A war that we may want to call criminal acts or a law enforcement matter, but it is a war. Why? Because those behind it on the other side believe and act as if it is a war.

      Good to have you at SUFA. Welcome.

      Hope you stick around and engage in the discussions.


  2. Let me first say, that all the Media hacks who call for war should lead the way in full battle gear if war does indeed happen. Second, every politician in Congress who calls for/votes for war should be sending either their kids or themselves in joining the media hacks. If this were to happen, the US would never be in a war again.

    ISIS is a product of the US. We funded and armed them in Syria. I have no doubt that they are likely in Iraq on orders from their handlers (CIA). There are many reasons for this, that I have posted in the past. Say NO to war!

    Anita, I hope you and yours recover well. You have had it hard enough the last few days (because you were no prepared) so I will save my (Told Ya So) scathing speech for another day. Glad you are OK and made it through 🙂 p.s. next time may not end so quickly.

  3. Let me start……

    ” Our liberal journalists are outraged and demanding justice for the two reporters beheaded on UTube. Lets first stop right there and ask, is this grounds for the US to declare war?”
    D13 says: No !

    ” If so, does this mean the US government is now guaranteeing the safety of all American journalists that enter war zones? ”
    D13 says: There should be no guarantees for anyone entering a war zone.

    ” Is it tied to human rights and what the UN will rule on how people are treated?”
    D13 says: Just look at who is on the UN human rights council and then ask the question again.

    ” Back to our history, did our media force the US to declare war on Spain? ”
    D13 asks: The 1898 War?

    ” But so too were the thousands or tens of thousands raped, brutalized and killed by ISIS.”
    D13: There is nothing unusual here. Look at the history of the Persian Empire. Rape and slavery were rewards for soldiers.

    ” Is our reason for entering this conflict the reporters or to protect human rights? How many other conflicts have we ignored?”
    D13: Neither to the first part of the question…..and many is the answer to the second part of the question….and not asked….we are still ignoring greater atrocities on the African Continent.

    ” Is it because ISIS has declared war on America? Didn’t the terrorists in Nigeria also declare war on us after kidnapping those school girls?”
    D13: Every militant and most non militants have declared jihad on all Westerners and kidnapping the school girls was designed for extortion money as well as having….school girls.

    ” The latest outcry by FOX & the Repug’s is that Obama has had intelligence on ISIS for over a year. Why has it taken him so long to act?
    D13: Because he does not want to act. Obama is not in charge. The intelligence has been in for a long time. ( Look at the relationship between Soros and Valerie Jarrett very closely ).

    ” A year ago they were rebels fighting the regime in Syria we would like to see overthrown. It is possible we supplied them with weapons. There are also reports the Saudi’s and other ME powers supported ISIS”
    D13: Yes. Yes.

    ” Then they invaded Iraq. Should we have immediately jumped back into that hornets nest?”
    D13: No.

    “At what point does it become our duty or right to step into this conflict. And if we do, who’s side are we even on?”
    D13: None and no one.

    ” And all these war mongering journalists, I’d like to see them right there with them…”
    D13: Put them on the front lines and do not guarantee their safety. They take their chances.

    That’s about it.

  4. We certainly won’t get the truth from most in the media or this pathetic administration. Which brings this up: http://eaglerising.com/8497/fox-news-host-white-house-told-get-colleagues-back-benghazi/

  5. Where was your outrage when the Shah was raping and murdering its people?

    …or anywhere else?

    Why do you believe that increasing the violence on a nation would stop this? No, it created it.

    Now you arguing for more violence to stop it. How’s that working for ya?

    To understand ISIS, remember the definition between terrorist and solider. They do the same thing.

    The former is a non-state actor, the latter is a state actor.

    ISIS declared itself a state, thereby creating soldiers out of their “terrorists’, which equally is why other States resist acknowledging this declaration.

    • There has been less rape and murder under the Mullahs?

      Question, You are fairly good with history. Are you of the opinion that as time went on, dictators like Franco in Spain and Tito in Yugoslavia, liberalized?

    • “Look at history. Iran has not invaded another nation for 300 years.”
      A selective look at history. Muslims invaded Europe. It took the combined armies of several nations to drive them out. Thousands of years of fighting that has one constant, some of them are always at war. It would be better to name any period of peace in the Middle East in the last 300 years?


      • What do you mean liberalized?

        • Well, firing squads got few and far between and certainly in Franco’s case he prepared for his succession and the return to democracy under a Constitutional Monarch. I find fault with Tito for not doing the same. Though again, things got much better. Yugoslavia got much better, opened up to the West, attracted tourists and Capital as well as folks returning to the homeland who had been driven out after WW 2, especially ethnic Italians along the dalmatian coast.

          • “Well, firing squads got few and far between and certainly in Franco’s case he prepared for his succession and the return to democracy under a Constitutional Monarch. I find fault with Tito for not doing the same.”

            Again, you have not study much about either.

            Spain was Spain, before and after Franco.
            Yugoslavia did not exist before Tito, and does not exist after.

            The separatist movement in Spain by the Basque existed long before Franco.
            Yugoslavia was a slap-together State of numerous groups and cultures after WW1.

            • I asked specifically if you saw moderation on the part of the leaders?

              Spain, if I remember had been a republic and Yugoslavia was a kingdom admittedly for a short time. The question had to do with the leaders not the history of the countries. The Basques? What exactly do they have to do with anything?

              So, Franco was in for 35 years and Tito about the same.

      • Typical mind fart.
        Totally ignore the West’s wars upon the world and pretend its all the Muslims fault.

        Your Islamaphobia is growing

        • I reject your assertion. I do not ignore the West’s many wars and conflicts. I think many of them are a separate subject. Some of them are worthy of joint discussions. So no, my Islamaphobia is not growing. It’s about the same size it’s always been. Now my Flagaphobia is flaring up like you would not believe… But to answer what you want to talk around. How about a hundred years?


          • Yes, you do ignore it.

            You ignore the current condition of that area is a direct result of your own government’s action, therefore, pretending that the situation faced today requires your government’s action and blame it on Islam.

  6. When are we going to be legally allowed to defend our rights against out of control cops? We live in a police state and need to reverse it, slam the door shut and tell the State they WILL NOT attack us: http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/09/08/chilling-video-man-assaulted-arrested-by-bully-cops-for-recording-militarized-neighborhood-raid-144241

  7. Just A Citizen says:

    I tried to engage SUFA in a mind game about Free Trade the other day. With little success.

    So I will extend it on my own and BF can add his two cents. I hope others do as well, or at least give it some thought.

    If we UNILATERALLY move to complete Free Trade, how will this affect conflict in the world? How will it affect groups like ISIS who may actually have grander plans?

    Now lets imagine the Bankers and Weapons manufacturers are free to sell their goods and services to whom ever they choose.

    What will be the results? Short term, mid term, long term??

    Now if we extend the Anarchist model further we need to recognize we have NO GOVT to purchase any of these weapons in our own National Defense. That will be up to the Corporations and Uber Wealthy to buy up the weapons needed to defend their holdings. Hoping they include the rest of us in the deal.

    Point here is that maybe a Full and Immediate conversion to Free State is not a RATIONAL choice.

    • “If we UNILATERALLY move to complete Free Trade, how will this affect conflict in the world?”

      This question is non sequitor.
      You are positing an economic action, then asking a political question. It is like asking “If we sing a song, will salt taste sweet?”

      Free trade arguments rest on principles.
      Political arguments rest on choices.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        OK, since you are chasing your self anointed rabbits once again lets take this from the top. I was going to ignore your false statements and strawmen but you are once again degrading the discussion and chasing away anyone who might wish to offer a thought.

        I will address your first response to my question:

        “If we UNILATERALLY move to complete Free Trade, how will this affect conflict in the world?”

        This question is non sequitor.”

        FALSE. A non-sequitor is a logical fallacy dealing with “statements” and “conclusions” that are not logically connected to the prior or justifying statement.

        So you see, a QUESTION is not a conclusion nor a statement. It is nothing but a question.

        “You are positing an economic action, then asking a political question. It is like asking “If we sing a song, will salt taste sweet?””

        FALSE. I posed a political assumption. Namely that the US as a matter of POLITICAL policy removed all regulations restricting free trade UNILATERALY. As in without concurrence or treaty with any other nation state. That is a POLITICAL decision.

        It is a political decision which will have ECONOMIC as well as POLITICAL ramifications. Because politics affects people’s choices which in turn change the potential economic outcomes of their decisions. Just as their economic condition can impact their politics.

        “Free trade arguments rest on principles.
        Political arguments rest on choices.”

        Strawman slogans. I was not making a case for Free Trade. That was the assumption. The question was how will this affect the level of violence in the world. The other day I asked how this might affect us economically. If you like you can mix the two responses.

        Now let me show you how a less arrogant and abrasive person might have addressed the question.

        “It won’t affect the violence because bad people will continue being bad”. It might change who they purchase weapons from as they might choose US arms dealers over Russian. This would in turn create more profits and possible employment in the US arms industry. At the same time, expanded trade, in other goods/services, to bad places might reduce stress on the populations there or remove the US as a strawman by which the tyrants are able to keep their populations focused away from their plight. Better economic conditions might reduce the number of people willing to be radicalized. against outsiders.”

        Not saying any of these affects would or would not occur. Simply showing you how to provide an answer without INSULTING your audience.

        • JAC

          There is no chase.

          Either ask a:
          Economic question
          Political question
          Philosophical question.

          Do not expect economics to answer a political question, nor a philosophical question.

          “FALSE. A non-sequitor is a logical fallacy dealing with “statements” and “conclusions” that are not logically connected to the prior or justifying statement.”

          It is NOT logically connected, as I said “You are asking what music note tastes salty?”

          Your question REQUIRES an inference of such a thing, hence, RIDICULOUS.

          “ That is a POLITICAL decision.”

          Correct. It is a CHOICE, and as I have already explained the consequences of that choice previously.

          Re-read it if you still did not understand.

          “POLITICAL ramifications”


          This is where you fail conceptually.

          “The question was how will this affect the level of violence in the world.”

          What nonsense.
          As I pointed out, you fail in principles. I already presented the self-evident case that free market replaced directed markets lowers violence. It is self-evident by principle

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Principles do not make anything self-evident, except to the person positing the principle.

            • Black Flag® says:


              Principles are “a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for chain of reasoning”

              As such, the utilizing said principle, removing restrictions upon the choices of people lowers violence.

              I know you want your little fantasy to be right, JAC, that you need to impose violence upon your own people as a means to reduce violence on foreign people, but it does not and has never worked.

              • Just A Citizen says:


                You have lost credibility with me. When you can have an HONEST discussion I will engage again. Until then have fun talking to yourself.

              • OF course it is not a strawman, that is exactly your posit

                You want to put restrictions upon the people here as a way to lower violence over there.
                GEEZ JAC, you do not even know what you are positing!
                (To help your memory loss, here is what you said:
                “we UNILATERALLY move to complete Free Trade, how will this affect conflict in the world”
                followed by your prescription:
                ” a Full and Immediate conversion to Free State is not a RATIONAL choice”)

                Clearly, applying your prescription in corollary: freedom for your own people is irrational.

                If you think this is a strawman, then you have voided your own argument.

            • Black Flag® says:

              By your discourse, I take it you believe that:

              If you INCREASE the violence in society, lessens violence.
              If you DECREASE the violence in society, increases violence.

              But that makes you utterly irrational.

            • Black Flag® says:

              To simplify for you JAC:

              Lowering violence upon the individuals of society, lowers the violence in society.
              Increasing violence upon the individuals of society, increases the violence in society.

              Forcing restrictions upon the free choices of non-violent individuals, increases violence in society
              Removing restrictions upon the free choices of non-violent individuals, decreases violence in society.

              Free trade lowers the violence in society.
              Restricted trade increases the violence in society.

              Restricting people here increases the violence here. Restricting people here does nothing for the violence, up or down, else where. They are neither restricted or freed by the increase in violence here.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                So now it is OK to mix Politics with Economics. A Political decision with an economic outcome and an Economic decision with a Political outcome.

    • To explain further why the question is bizarre.

      Whether you have free trade or restricted trade, matters not to whether some group has plans. Obviously under massive restricted trade, this group has plans. Why would they not have plans under Free Trade? There is no reason. People plan

      Further, you posit another ridiculous myth. The fact, today, under restricted trade weapon manufacturers sell their weapons to whomever they can. To then state, “well, under free trade, the will sell their weapons to whomever they can” – as if this is a condition only under free trade is bizarre. You use a problem that exists politically today as if it is only a problem with free men

      The point, your argument is ridiculous start to finish.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Actually I did none of the things you are claiming I did.

        I did, however, ask several questions. Which you once again side step by diverting the discussion into the topic of your choice.

        Under the current system…….banks and weapons manufacturers are NOT free to ply their trade where ever they choose. Politics prevents that.

        I do not confuse the two. However, they are related as each affects the other.

        • JAC
          “Under the current system…….banks and weapons manufacturers are NOT free to ply their trade where ever they choose. Politics prevents that.”

          Nonsense. Weapons and money is available to weapons consumers writ large. Your claim utterly fails in the face of fact.

          “However, they are related as each affects the other.”

          No. This is economic confusion.

          Economics explains CONSEQUENCES. It does NOT make choices. It explains the CONSEQUENCE of choices.

          Look, you are positing a condition upon free markets that exists already currently, inferring it does not exist currently.

          Further, free market does not manifest better or worse of men. Men do not become angels under free market when they were evil under tyranny, nor do men become angels in a closed market that were evil in a free market.

          Men are men. That statement is a fundamental economic law.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            This weekend you spent hours and volumes explaining how politics distorts the economic outcomes and a free people would CHOOSE differently. CHOICE is a key component of economic life. More freedom then more choice.

            Sometimes you just can’t get out your own way.

            US Weapons makers are openly and freely trading with North Korea and Iran??

            Besides, even if they were it does not disprove a QUESTION.

            “Further, free market does not manifest better or worse of men. Men do not become angels under free market when they were evil under tyranny, nor do men become angels in a closed market that were evil in a free market.

            Men are men. That statement is a fundamental economic law.”

            I agree, mostly. Interesting how much time you spend explaining how there would be less violence under a Free Market world though. Remove violence from economic life and people will become less violent. Has that not been your mantra?

            • “This weekend you spent hours and volumes explaining how politics distorts the economic outcomes and a free people would CHOOSE differently. CHOICE is a key component of economic life. More freedom then more choice.”

              I explained outcomes. Your question revolved around benefit. I specifically stated for you to define which benefit you were asking about, whether (analogously) you were a lamp post manufacturer or not.

              Depending on who you were, your choice of action is different. Lamp post manufacturers would cheer restrictions, others would not. I asked what group are you in?

              It is you who is expecting ECONOMICS makes CHOICES. It does not. It explains consequences.

              The lesson all economics teaches is that conceited men have a pretense – a fantasy – that they are in command of sufficient knowledge to dictate upon others what choices should be made.

              But because they do not have such knowledge, such dictates are fraught with massively contradictory outcomes – that is, a forced choice pretending a benefit turns into a massive loss.

              Economics teaches that no man has sufficient knowledge to dictate the choices of others, therefore, FREE CHOICE is the optimum organization for men.

              This does not mean that men will suddenly make only good choices when they are free

              Freedom means the right to make choices and receiving said consequences. Nothing more.

              So you asking the question you are is ridiculous.

              “US Weapons makers are openly and freely trading with North Korea and Iran??”

              No need since they got their weapons essentially for free from someone else.

              “Besides, even if they were it does not disprove a QUESTION.”
              Don’t have to disprove the question. The question is RIDICULOUS. You are pretending a circumstance occurs only in one system, when the circumstance has nothing to do with any system.

              “I agree, mostly. Interesting how much time you spend explaining how there would be less violence under a Free Market world though.”

              It is your failure of comprehension and lack of applying root principles.

              If you INCREASE the violence in society, it is self-evident you will have more violence.
              If you DECREASE the violence in society, it is self-evident you will have less violence.

              You INCREASE violence in society by forcing choices upon free men.
              You DECREASE violence in society by not forcing choices upon free men.

              Such self-evidence seems totally lacking in your mind set.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      I saw that early this AM. Very interesting to say the least. Somebody just put BOTH players in a spotlight.

  8. Just A Citizen says:


    re: Bush in Iraq

    “Both, it was deliberate and specific.”

    I disagree and have seen ZERO evidence that this was the objective of the Bush administration. This idea was offered by Kerry in the POTUS race, among others on the left.

    Such a thing would have been antithetical to the NEO Con way of looking at the world.

    I would agree that their actions effectively led to the segregation of various groups. I find no evidence to indicate this was their goal, and thus their actions were designed to “deliberately” accomplish this.

    Kerry may have been right in that it was inevitable. On the other hand there are certainly a lot of Iraqis, both Sunni and Shite, that seem to want to preserve a Nation State of Iraq.

  9. Just A Citizen says:


    I forgot to say, good topic this morning. Now if we can just increase the number of those who would express their answer to “What If?”

    Did want to say that I think Mr. Obama has been doing just fine on the middle east, at least from the perspective of “disengaging”.

    I am not sure, as I said before, whether this is deliberate or by accident because his advisors are over their head and he has no foundation to work from. Ideology can sometimes cloud our ability to deal with reality.

    This may be why he seems to want to disengage one minute and is bombing someone the next.

    I have no heart burn over POTUS and Congress stepping back and taking a hard look at the options and possible outcomes. Take what time is needed for a comprehensive strategy. On the other hand we could be watching “paralysis due to analysis”. Hard to tell.

    My heartburn is over the accusation that no such plans exist. They should have existed under the Bush Admin and the current Administration should have updated them constantly. Especially if their goals differed. If Mr. Obama is just now getting around to developing such a plan then our worst fears about his administration are well founded.

    We hate the Bush plan is NOT a strategy.

    • Black Flag® says:


      It is not paralysis.

      The best strategy is to do nothing.

      When the enemy of my enemy is my enemy, my friend’s enemy is my friend – the course of action of “do nothing” is probably the best course.

      Let the thing work itself out. No extra stirring is required.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        You have no idea what is going on in the white house.

        This administration has suffered from two afflictions. Over analysis and no analysis.

    • Thanks JAC! I find myself flip flopping on how I think we should react. I think when you find yourself in that situation, to advocate for war/violence is plainly wrong. I still see ISIS & terrorists needing to be shifted to another plane of existence, but that does not make it our job or us being given that right. And that brings us back to my main gripe at all the war advocates, they cannot & do not express their logic for war in a credible way. Why ISIS but not Boko Haram? Or are they # 2 or #3 on the list?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        I think you are right. When we feel unsure about what to do it is probably best to wait. Our doubt is because reality is not lining up with our principles.

        So either our principle is correct and we are fighting off some emotional response caused by reality, or we sense that reality is distorted, or we need to re check our principle.

        Sometimes when faced with reality it may well be that our principles or values are not aligned.

        The war advocates are stuck in an old paradigm. I do not think they all have the same objectives, however. Some actually think we can be the good guys by going around killing off the bad guys. Others still think it is better we do the policing than have the world rearmed to pre WWII days. And I think there are those who view the world as a big chess game and war just one more tool in their box to help them gain global domination.

        I think Mr. Obama is doing the right thing by slowing the reaction down a bit and doing some hard thinking. At the same time he has done a lousy job of explaining this to the people and as I said before, it should have been done months and months ago.

        • “Some actually think we can be the good guys by going around killing off the bad guys.”

          Works in every action movie I have ever watched! America gets it’s principals for Hollywood….. Funny it doesn’t work in the real world… But then the comedy movies show it doesn’t work so action movie moralists need to watch more comedies and it will all start working out….

          • Just A Citizen says:


            Funny. You may be on to something. MORE COMEDY.

            Re action films, Lil JAC and I saw Expendables 3 a couple weeks back. What a hoot that was. Yeah, the usual blow em up, shoot em up and kick thar ass stuff. But the jokes and clichés were hilarious. And it was fun seeing all those “old timers” in one movie along with the “new generation”. I only recognized one of the young ones.

  10. Let me get this right. NFL running back Ray Rice gets suspended for two games for knocking his girlfriend out (then dragging her un-conscience body out of elevator). He plead guilty and is dealing with the after affects of being a stupid barbarian.

    Now, a video is released of him knocking his girlfriend (now his wife) out cold (which everybody on the planet already knew) and now he is suspended indefinitely and released by the team. WOW, did they all think he just flicked her in the nose with his middle finger? What the hell is wrong with this picture? Ray Rice was punished by the courts and the NFL. Now, he’s being punished AGAIN, and much more severely for the same incident.

    While I agree he should have been originally suspended longer, to enact more punishment over the same incident is simply WRONG! The NFL should be sued, as should the Ravens. Had they acted with the second punishment originally, I would have no problems, but, just because we can all see the knockout blow somehow it makes things different. Not to me. This is one time when the race pimps should be calling for action. Where is Jesse and Sharpton now? I don’t see this as racist, but more as “double jeopardy”. BS!

    • Black Flag® says:

      Double jeopardy only exists in law, not in the exercise of a right to determine who works for them.

      Indeed, they have no need to provide any reason, let alone be criticized for whatever reason they may have.

    • NFL/Ravens, as his employer can decide he no longer represents the image they are trying to convey. Happens all the time.

      • Yes, they should have acted from the get go, not because of a video of the act itself. This is just MSM BS to take focus off of the failure of a Messiah. I believe Rice should be punished, but let’s have the punishment fit the crime. Mrs Rice, got punched, because she spit on her old man (this is all now coming out), is pissed at the media and rightfully so. This is a private issue, after any court issues are resolved (which they have been).

        When will the masses demand the welfare be stopped for such issues? How about child neglect? Stop all welfare and remove child? My main point is, they knew Rice punched her and should have took this current action then. All their doing now is trying to save face, at the expense of not only Ray Rice, but the victim of the assault, what sense does that make?

        I do not agree with hitting women (real women, not the pretend women who can’t figure out what they want to be). Women should not strike first, that’s an invitation to get cracked. Not all men are the same, many will deck a broad for spouting off. Don’t want hit, don’t hit first is a good rule. There are too many variables out there, so I don’t simply judge a person. That’s God’s job, not mine.

  11. Kathy! Have to give you credit for the shade you threw at me on the last page. Still laughing. But I’m getting the last laugh so far…cause check out my Lions right now!

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Lions looked pretty good. One of the first times I watched that Stafford looked like the franchise they wanted. Still some flaws to fix but a lot of talent.

      Now for my warning…………… watch out for the Vikings.

      Did you get everything back to normal yet?

      • Yeah, we’re good here at my house, daughter lives 11 miles from me…she got turned on around midnight Sunday. She went out and bought a generator. I figured everybody I cared about was ok, so I cleaned up extension cords and candles and such. Got my clothes washed. Oh, it’s a wonderful thing to have clean clothes!! Yesterday morning a friend from 2 blocks away called to tell me he was still without power and was told he wouldn’t be back on til probably tonight. So I loaded up the generator and extension cords and headed to his place,and listened to the noise over his house for a while!
        We watched with the garage door open, it was sooooomething! The steam coming off roofs and asphalt mixed with spraying water off rooftops, it looked like a hurricane, for real, just a wall of water in the air. Lightning like I haven’t seen in years. Huge limbs falling from trees. Trees totally uprooted laying down. Transformers arcing all over the place.Temperature went from 94* to 73* in less than 10 minutes. Still have 80k without power in my county. Large parking lot within eyesight is a staging ground for electric and tree service guys from Ohio, I counted 20 trucks there. I enjoyed watching it, glad it happened around 5pm instead of after dark. I’m more glad to have power back! More storms due in this afternoon.

  12. Just A Citizen says:

    There is a personal connection to this murder. The original trial and re-trial was frustrating and gut wrenching. Now this. Makes my stomach ache once again only even more bizzare.

    The Mitchell family has to be going through hell ………..AGAIN.


  13. SUFA FYI, our new visitor obscureecho has a blog. Haven’t had time to read much or comment, have to click on comments on left it looks like, but saw some interesting things. There is a recent article on the Ukraine invasion and also Ferguson…


    • Just another parrot.

      “A bunch of guys say Russia has invaded, therefore it is a fact they have” nonsense.

      • 1. Did you tell him/her that? Leave a comment at their site?
        2. Name calling again?
        3. The little I skimmed looked well researched and well thought out. You would need facts and logic to sway me to your interpretation. And the last exchange you had with D13 left me believing he had the facts on the tanks & hardware being used…..
        4. Have a very nice day…

        • 1. Couldn’t be bothered. Just another one of those mindless blogs
          2. Suck it up. I call like I see it.
          3. Did already, but you ignore what doesn’t fit in your fantasy world view.
          4. You too.

    • I mean, how stupid is this statement:
      “Although Moscow continues to deny their invasion, Pro-Russian separatists have publicly admitted that Russian troops are fighting with them.”

      Yes, they have – but to him that means Russia has invaded.
      So I guess the French that are fighting for the separatists means France has invaded too.

      Just goes to show that idiots with an opinion find an audience filled with idiots.

    • I mean, he doesn’t even know what is going on

      The fact that the illegal overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically elected and pro-Russian president — a “coup” — was the final straw for the Eastern separatists doesn’t even find a finger nail hold in his thinking.

      But oh no! That can’t be the reason because – gee, Russia is evil!

    • Dear Mr. President Putin,

      Please accept our apologies on behalf of a great many people here in the Netherlands for our Government and our Media. The facts concerning MH17 are twisted to defame you and your country.

      We are powerless onlookers, as we witness how the Western Nations, led by the United States, accuse Russia of crimes they commit themselves more than anybody else. We reject the double standards that are used for Russia and the West. In our societies, sufficient evidence is required for a conviction. The way you and your Nation are convicted for ‘crimes’ without evidence, is ruthless and despicable.

      You have saved us from a conflict in Syria that could have escalated into a World War. The mass killing of innocent Syrian civilians through gassing by ‘Al-­‐Qaeda’ terrorists, trained and armed by the US and paid for by Saudi Arabia, was blamed on Assad. In doing so, the West hoped public opinion would turn against Assad, paving the way for an attack on Syria.

      Not long after this, Western forces have built up, trained and armed an ‘opposition’ in the Ukraine, to prepare a coup against the legitimate Government in Kiev. The putschists taking over were quickly recognized by Western Governments. They were provided with loans from our tax money to prop their new Government up.

      The people of the Crimea did not agree with this and showed this with peaceful demonstrations. Anonymous snipers and violence by Ukrainian troops turned these demonstrations into demands for independence from Kiev. Whether you support these separatist movements is immaterial, considering the blatant Imperialism of the West.

      Russia is wrongly accused, without evidence or investigation, of delivering the weapons systems that allegedly brought down MH17. For this reason Western Governments claim they have a right to economically pressure Russia.

      We, awake citizens of the West, who see the lies and machinations of our Governments, wish to offer you our apologies for what is done in our name.
      It’s unfortunately true, that our media have lost all independence and are just mouthpieces for the Powers that Be. Because of this, Western people tend to have a warped view of reality and are unable to hold their politicians to account.

      Our hopes are focused on your wisdom. We want Peace. We see that Western Governments do not serve the people but are working towards a New World Order. The destruction of sovereign nations and the killing of millions of innocent people is, seemingly, a price worth paying for them, to achieve this goal.

      We, the people of the Netherlands, want Peace and Justice, also for and with Russia.
      We hope to make clear that the Dutch Government speaks for itself only. We pray our efforts will help to diffuse the rising tensions between our Nations.


      Professor Cees Hamelink

  14. The world hasn’t ended yet, cool 😎

  15. So…how many US troops are going to be boots on the ground again in Iraq by this POTUS…any guesses?

    • One is too many, but I think Obama is more interested in Syria, so the number may stay low. Nice job at refuting Flag, he needs to be educated once in awhile 😀

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Good afternoon Sir.

      I ignored the pirates bait over raping, pillaging and plundering our way across Iraq. I see you picked up the fight but I think you are pissin in the wind, my Texican friend. The word of someone who was actually there is not enough. The alternative sources, who all seem to be linked to either Anarchist or far left ideology, is of course the only truth.

      Frankly I find it an insult to my ancestors, who knew a thing or two about the pillaging and plundering……………… Fade in music from that old Kirk Douglass and Tony Curtis movie about Vikings. Always loved that song………. and dancing on the oars.

      As for Iraq Part Three……………. I am guessing 5,000. The Generals will ask for 10 to 20 and the Genius will cut it in half to make it look like he is not falling into the trap of another war in Iraq.

      Hope all is well with you and yours. Cooling off again today here, but sunny.

      By the way, on the Ukraine issue. Did you ever see any pictures of Russian tanks, etc, or evidence of troops in Ukraine? I wouldn’t know Russian hardware if it ran over me. Have any thoughts on the supposed satellite images of Russian assets assembled on Ukraine territory? Assuming of course they were not really part of a video game as the Russian official tried to claim. 😉

      • Black Flag® says:

        ” The word of someone who was actually there is not enough. ”

        What an air head comment – as if he saw “everything”

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Something > Nothing

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Hasty Generalisation Fallacy


          A hasty generalisation draws a general rule from a single, perhaps atypical, case. It is the reverse of a sweeping generalisation.


          (1) My Christian / atheist neighbour is a real grouch.
          (2) Christians / atheists are grouches.

          This argument takes an individual case of a Christian or atheist, and draws a general rule from it, assuming that all Christians or atheists are like the neighbour.

          The conclusion that it reaches hasn’t been demonstrated, because it may well be that the neighbour is not a typical Christian or atheist, and that the conclusion drawn is false.

      • Just A Citizen says:

      • I have seen plenty of pics and intel photos of Russian equipment in all parts of the Ukraine. Mostly old stuff….I have seen photos ( news photos ) of the new and improved T 80 and even the new T 90…but there was no position report that went with it…..they could have been on the Texas border….but my analogy still stands because I know Russian equipment and Russian tactics. If the new equipment is in the Ukraine…..it is manned by professional Russian soldiers and not anyone else.

        As to the raping and pillaging….I can only report what I have seen, read from insider reports, and been part of and what I did as a commander. I addressed all the issues. I take NO stock in internet reporting…especially anarchist sites, right wing sites nor left wing sites…all are skewed. BF is just fine with me…..he does not upset me at all….much like he always tells people that do not know or are ignorant…..he misses things all the time but everyone that has an axe to grind always wears rose colored glasses. So, I take no offense at BF at all. I know where he stands on the US and what he thinks of it,….it does not rile me…..he still lives here and he lives here by choice. So, he likes it.

        He is very conversant with economics and economic theories….but he is too much an academia for me…however, he and I see eye to eye on economics and the free trade. We also see eye to eye on tariffs and what it takes to economically survive. But again, he has his opinion…I have mine. My experience goes deep because I have been fortunate in that I have an excellent education, I have a family that is in several business’, I was able to pursue my military career and still be involved in board room decisions and economics…..and still am even though I am contracted with Texas….so..I have the benefit of world travel experience, living experience in other countries, military and civilian experience and it keeps me alive and thinking and healthy. That is all I can do is post experience and real life as I have seen it……and I have seen it from the silver spoon side to the children eating out of trash can side. ( Not my children but children around the world ). So….that is the best I can do.

        I will say this…..in every war or occupation, there are individuals who do evil criminal things. But there are no unorganized military bands of rapists and pillagers…..to say so is wrong.

        BF believes that any military is a murderer. That is ok….

        I like to believe the following quote from John S Mill….

        War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing is worth war is much worse. The man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight and nothing that he cares about more than his own personal safety is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.”

        That about sums it up.

        Have a great one JAC…..and think of us on the border this week…lots of chatter and lots of strange activity.

        • Black Flag® says:

          Of course it sums it up.

          To promote the State, which as its core is violence, it needs the ability to wreck such violence to every massive degree.

          The author asserts out of his ass that men free from the overt evil of the State, they will be evil. Therefore, let’s do evil FIRST

          He becomes a party to the most terrible evil upon mankind, that men benefit from the violence upon the non-violent, and this is a “good” thing to do.

          Your prose does not change any of the horrific immoral underpinnings, nor the evil.

  16. Just A Citizen says:

    Can’t wait to see the left wing propaganda machine go into full wagon circling mode:


    Any bets that it includes trashing Issa personally? That it will involve ridicule to the point of absurdity? Deflection?

  17. Just A Citizen says:
  18. Just A Citizen says:

    I am reminded of a quote, which I can only summarize, from a German who was asked how they allowed the Nazis to stay in power.

    The response was along the lines of: “We did not pay much attention to them because the made the trains run on time.”


    • JAC


      When some people see a personal benefit to the violence, their focus is on the “seen” – what is in their view range – and not on what is “unseen”, the tremendous, but subtle, destruction of society about them.

      No different then from many comments from you and others here.

  19. Just A Citizen says:

    Thought of the morning:

    “We do not need more intellectual power; we need more moral power. We do not need more knowledge; we need more character. We do not need more government; we need more culture. We do not need more law; we need more religion. We do not need more of the things that are seen; we need more of the things that are unseen”
    ― Calvin Coolidge

    • Of all that quote, only the last line is correct.

      To have more moral power, you need to think critically within principles.

      To have more character, you need to have more knowledge and understanding of others.

      Culture empowers government. It is the continuation of “this is how we did things before, therefore, how we must do now”.

      Law and religion are two sides to the same coin – mind control of the masses

  20. President Barack Obama is set to ignore Congress once again by launching military strikes inside Syria without consulting lawmakers, a move that threatens to enflame the entire region given that the Assad government has repeatedly insisted it will consider any military activity inside Syrian territory as an act of war.

    “President Obama is prepared to use U.S. military airstrikes in Syria as part of an expanded campaign to defeat the Islamic State and does not believe he needs formal congressional approval to take that action, according to people who have spoken with the president in recent days,”reports the Washington Post.

    Obama is set to deliver a prime time speech tonight during which he will make the case for U.S. air strikes inside Syria in the name of targeting ISIS militants.

    In citing ISIS, which was armed and funded by the United States’ biggest allies in the region, as a justification for a military campaign inside Syria, Obama is set to accomplish what the administration failed to achieve last year after the chemical weapons attack in Ghouta was blamed on the Assad government, despite a subsequent MIT report which concluded the incident was more likely the work of US-backed rebels.

    Despite many calling for Washington to renew its support for so-called “moderate” rebels in Syria in the name of combating ISIS, it recently emerged that murdered journalist Steven Sotloff was sold to ISIS by FSA militants. In addition, arms given to FSA rebels that originated from the U.S. and Saudi Arabia were later seized by ISIS fighters.

    Bassel Idriss, commander of an FSA-run rebel brigade, also recently admitted that US-backed “moderate” rebels are still collaborating with ISIS.

    • Obama gets his wish, bombing Syria because the actions of HIS people the HE supported, funded and armed. Nice false flag there Obama, you have fooled the sheople again 😦

      • Wouldn’t really call it a false flag this time. It’s been pretty public who he funded and when. Don’t really think it’s his wish to bomb anyone either, he’s the last guy wanting to bomb anyone. Just in time for elections, though…drive his own base away….better for the Rs,

        • Good tweet on Twitchy, though:

          Are Peace Prize winners allowed to become arms dealers?

        • Just A Citizen says:


          It may tick off his base but about 70% of Americans currently support bombing ISIS/ISIL.

          So Mr. Obama could come out of this looking all smart and LEADER LIKE. In other words, he polling numbers may climb which could give the Dems running in midterm a needed boost among the middle.

          Watch for the RACIST and War on Women crap to begin escalating in a major way. This is the only thing they have to keep those two parts of their base motivated. They must fear the other side so much they will vote for anyone with a D next to their name.

          • Airstrikes, maybe. Ground troops, no. I don’t see an appetite for ground troops. The message coming out of DC is too much of a clusterf%&*. Obama= no strategy. Biden = follow them to the gates of hell. Hagel=most dangerous org..deep threat. Kerry= where has he been anyway? Stay missing Kerry. I’ve grown deaf to whatever Congress is saying but haven’t heard any serious war drums beating.

            re: the polls…Have you seen the questions…and the choice of answers. As usual you can get the numbers you need by framing the Q&A right. I think the 70% better be careful what they wish for.

            I’m thinking…arm them all, then get outta the way. let them eat each other alive. We’re going to get the blame no matter what.

            • Anita, go back when the chems were used and Obama wanted to bomb Syria. Despite the fact that the rebels used them and we all knew it, Obama still tried to get the support. Obama is a compulsive liar whose legacy at this point is in the gutter. He needs something to prop up that legacy, sadly, he’s not that smart and those who could give him that something don’t support him.

              Why does anyone think the US has the right to military action in a sovereign country, without that countries permission? Doing so, in my opinion, is an act of stupidity/insanity. If I were the military, I would tell Obama to pound sand because he is likely giving orders to break International law, which makes the order illegal. Just my opinion of course, but that’s how I feel.

              Oh! Are you now somewhat better prepared for those unexpected emergencies? Loss of power is my #1 reason for prepping. All the other reasons are minor, as far as predicting the future. Just some thing to think about 🙂

              • Well, I do have gas, working generator, clean clothes, food…so I’m good to go. Currently trying to make a big pizza to eat off for the next couple days, but we’re getting socked again as we speak, already lost power twice today and it’s really not that wicked out. Hope I can finish this pizza. But if I come up missing again you’ll know why. 🙂

            • Just A Citizen says:


              We are supposed to get hit with Cold, mid 30’s tonight and tomorrow am along with STRONG winds in the “steady at 35 to 40” with “gusts to 50+”.

              So heads up cause the jet stream is dipping down from Alaska on top of me and then heading due east by north east…………right at ya.

  21. I think this is telling. Can anyone trust Democrats anymore? I think not. Is the DoJ equally part of the crimes committed and should those within the department, beginning with Holder be jailed for a lengthy period of time? I think so!

    Now someone — probably the same person or people — is conspiring with Democrats on the committee investigating the IRS scandal to leak documents before the committee is ready to release them.
    Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/17004/nailed-department-justice-caught-conspiring-democrats-irs-investigation/#F9Cdls2vldEpv2e9.99

    This is but one reason I consider the Progressive/Democrats Nazi’s. Not one lick of a difference.

  22. Just A Citizen says:

    On corruption in Govt, whistleblowers courage, and where the EPA is headed, without restraint.



    Then what does the I stand for?


    • Of course not, Islam is a religion of peace BWAHAHAHA! The I stands for idiot, which correctly describes Obama 😀

    • Amazing isn’t it? ISIS says they are acting in accordance with their belief in their Islamic religion, which includes destroying any and all that don’t agree with their interpretation. Our president and his administration say, no you guys are silly – that is not what you stand for.


    • David Skekabim says:

      You people’s blindness is frustrating.

      Within any religion there will be a percentage who are overzealous and espouse a radical interpretation, …and like any other group of humans, will organize. This is how groups like ISIL and Westboro Baptist Church happen.

      Government agencies and people of influence exploit unstable circumstance and groups like ISIL in order to help create a problem which will serve as an excuse for action that benefits them in some way.

      Whenever something happens, the media hypes it up as if all hell is breaking loose in order to scare everyone so they will be in full support of military action that will ultimately cause the rich and powerful to become richer and more powerful.

      …and the sheeple fall for it every time.

      Even though people are aware and intelligent enough to see the reality of it, they band together and claim a generalized scapegoated enemy as to rationalize and protect the state and religion they have attached to their egos.

      It is much easier to blame Islam than it is to face the reality that you’re duped into consistently supporting a corrupt system that exploits and enslaves you and them both. It is much easier to blame Islam than to realize that you are no better and just as supportive of evil as those you charge as such. It is much easier to gain/maintain social acceptance and solidarity by jumping on the bandwagon than it is to boldly speak out against the stupidity.

      People rationalize that since ISIL kills people in the name of Islam, Islam is evil. …Not that ISIL is evil, …not that organized radical religion is evil, …but that Islam is evil.

      ISIL + violence = evil + Islam = Islam is evil
      USA + Christianity = Christian Nation
      Evil Islam x Christian Nation = Islam is a threat to USA
      Threat = justified military response

      Americans cry “death to Islam in the name of the USA and Jesus!”, the bombs fall, troops move in, guns are fired and innocent people are killed.

      Muslims say;

      Christianity + USA + Military strikes = Dead Innocent Muslims
      Christianity = evil
      USA Christian Evil x Muslim Good = Christianity threat to Islam
      Threat = justified Jihad

      Muslims cry “Death to America, Death to the infidels!” and lash out with violence, …and someone on a blog somewhere points and says “See, I told you Islam is evil”

      …and the cycle continues…

      The answer is to reach out in love and what is right, to unite as humans in celebration of diversity and individual freedom, to speak out against those who are a threat to peace, …not to divide in groups according to idealism and state.

      When enough people unite in peace, the violent and evil become exposed. Divided and conquered becomes knowing your enemy.

      • And your anarchist view is equally troubling. As though we should just step back and let this sort itself out. It doesn’t work that way, or it would have by now. If we step back,they continue to kill….prove me wrong. On second thought, save it. I don’t even feel like wading through a bunch of JISTIFICATION for evil!

        • David Skekabim says:

          ” As though we should just step back and let this sort itself out. ”

          I do not suggest doing nothing. I suggest unified intolerance of groups like ISIL, corrupt governments and special interests. …and everything that otherwise inhibits humanity from peaceful coexistence and progress.

          ” It doesn’t work that way, or it would have by now. ”

          Nor does it work out by continuing the cycle.

          ” I don’t even feel like wading through a bunch of JISTIFICATION for evil! ”

          Then don’t. Snap out of it.

        • What nonsense, Anita.

          You proclaim “it would have worked out already if we left alone, but it hasn’t” when in fact you haven’t left it alone

          So you screwing it becomes my fault.

          • Tell me why then, in Saudi Arabia, the penalty for apostasy is death.

            No stirring required.

            • Muslim Brotherhood, Hasan al-Banna (1906-1949) of Egypt. He said:

              “It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its law on all nations, and to extend its power to the entire planet.”

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Now despite the long list and explanations supporting violence, note that the author recognizes that support for violence today is primarily driven by the personal beliefs of members.

                Thus you get the suppressive version and support for Jihad in certain parts of the world and not so much in other.


              • Nonsense.

                You attempt to portray that the history of Islam and Christianity shows the idea that Islam is always and everywhere violent, or that Christianity is inherently virtuous.

                Such nonsense continues the cycle of ignorance.

            • Why do you care?
              Do you believe bombing them will change them?

              Such a ridiculous comment you make….

              • I care because apostates and infidels are the same thing to them. And since they have directly threatened me, as an infidel and as an American, it requires my attention. You can choose to not acknowledge the threat, but don’t mock me for having a bad attitude toward them. And save the ‘it’s not all Muslims’ speech. We both know who I’m talking about. THEY are the hegemony here, not me.. I’m not the one calling for their death in the name of Christianity. THEY are the ones who need to chill out, but THEY won’t. You say the hegemony must back down for there to be peace. I say it doesn’t work that way. And you BF are the one who calls for shame to be put on people like that. So I call them out and you call me ridiculous. Way to make me the bad guy BF. That’s a bunch of bull.

                • The perversity of your position is astounding.

                  YOU are in THEIR COUNTRY, slaughtering hundreds of thousands, YOU are DEMANDING to BOMB THEM – and you demand THEM to chill out!! My gawd, can you be more warped???

                  How can they threaten you? You are 3,000 miles away!!! My gawd, you are getting worse!
                  YOU ARE THREATENING THEM, but your mind blindness is so deep, I’m sure nothing can penetrate.

                  You are so ass-backwards in your understanding. No wonder your nation is collapsing.

              • WRONG!

                I have not threatened anyone. I did offer up weapons to all of them so they can blow themselves apart, which they do..in the name of Islam.

                I call them out from 3000 miles away so they will stay 3000 miles away…if you would shut the back door it might help me stay alive longer.

                • Anita,

                  Then they haven’t threatened you either – so what’s your problem?

                  You want to flip between the “you” of your government and “you” as an individual whenever it suits you, but they equally haven’t threatened you as an individual either – but that didn’t stop your perverse rant, did it????

                  They have no navy, no air force and you are afraid of them. .
                  Pretty weak and paranoid, huh?

              • I’ll give you credit for running good cover for them. Like I said you can choose to not acknowledge a direct threat. Or you can continue denying the direct threat. My situational awareness (yep, profiling) meter is pegged on high. At least I’ll know what hit me.

                • Direct threat????
                  Utter insanity. You are 3,000 miles away, surrounded by the largest air force and the largest navy in the world, and yet you are a scared.

                  As I said, weak and paranoid, like most Americans these days.

              • Does Dearborn, Mi ring a bell? I bet one steak dinner that I am less than 10 miles from a direct threat. And I’ll up the ante and say there’s more than one of them running around here. So, yeah.

              • Nice slam. Except Muslim isn’t a race. Race only matters to racists. You can call me an Islamaphobe if you want. Or Methaphobe. Or Crackheadaphobe. Or Rapistaphobe. Or Thiefaphobe. Those come in all colors.

              • Well Played Anita. Someone might want to remind Flaggy that when it comes to some cities and some neighborhoods, blacks are violent. However violent blacks are a minority of the Black race (but it’s enough to keep us whitey’s out of lots of neighborhoods). Radical Muslim’s are also a minority, but that 1+ % is still a large number, with a recent murder of an American having been committed by one of the radicals on American soil.

                I don’t walk around in fear, mainly because of the lack of criminals in my area, which makes someone who don’t seem to fit is easy to spot (I profile, big time, screw political correctness). Being aware of my surroundings is a learned habit and comes naturally. I also carry, everywhere.

                None of my actions make me a racist (nor do yours Anita). Those are claims coming from those with mental issues 😀

      • Exactly, David.

  24. Week 2 of the NFL is upon us. Last week My picks went 9-7 while D13 went 10-6 (great job). Time for this weeks fun:

    Ravens pull an upset of the Steelers at home. Should be a good game, as they usually are.
    Dolphins over Bills
    Redskins pull one out over Jacksonville
    Titans send Dallas packing in a shootout
    Cardinals win at the Giants
    Patriots outscore the Vikings
    Saints destroy the Browns
    Bengals take the Falcons in a great game
    Lions tame the other feline, the Panthers
    Tampa Bay runs over the Rams
    Seahawks keep winning at San Diego
    Texans beat Raiders
    Packers destroy the Jets
    Broncos crush the Chiefs
    49ers send the Bears home winless
    Colts win a shootout over Philly
    🙂 🙂 🙂

  25. Pigs are flying, hell is frozen over. I agree with Bill Maher on something.


  26. Just A Citizen says:

    WHAT IF?

    What if somebody conducted a political poll for each State asking “If you voted today who would you select for the office of ………….” Then list the candidates WITHOUT any party affiliation.

    Conduct the poll with a different “order” of names in different parts of the State.

    I wonder what the results would show.

  27. Having a problem with our going into Syria and arming the rebels. I don’t know how we can possibly work out any intelligent plan when we are working against the governmental structure of the Country while at the same time we are fighting with and against the opposition to the government in the Country. Just can’t wrap my mind around it.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      A guaranteed way to make sure they ALL hate us before it is said and done.

      Your instincts are spot on………..maybe we need to include V.H. in the VDLG State Department. 😉

      • Don’t be to quick to put me in the State Department 🙂 I’m quite sure you would disagree with me about our involvement in Iraq. There I think we should bomb the hell out of ISIS.

        • Yes, that has been such a success in the past, you suggest the US should do it again.

          Geez…. the old “I never learn” mindset.

        • If a terrible strategy has not worked at all in the past and is the direct reason hell is breaking out now, means …. do more of the terrible strategy, since that will fix what it caused.

          And people wonder why they screw up.

    • VH, here’s a thought to ponder. US bombs in Syria, rebels capture (so they say) a high ranking member of ISIS who, after being properly tortured by some CIA guys and tells them that Assad and the Syrian government are funding ISIS. This we would know as BS, but Obama would use it to get his wish, to take down the Assad regime. This whole thing is clearly a false flag so Obama could get jets in Syrian air space to help the rebels. Our government needs removed and replaced, with no teeth.

    • You are so right V.H.!!

      If stupid is as stupid does, how did out intervention in Libya work out? If it is possible to bend them to our will and force reforms, it will take years/decades and many boots on the ground. Exactly as Bush insisted. Exactly what Obama campaigned against and a promise he kept as best he could. Now his exit strategy has reset.

      It’s not enough to have Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Egypt seriously in turmoil and blaming us. Lets invade Syria and force them to unleash chemical weapons… At least that will give Obama the excuse to whip out the nukes… He’ll go down in history for sure…

    • From Air Force Magazine, today.

      Obama Seeks Approval on Syrian Opposition Training Program
      President Obama has asked Congress to authorize a training center in Saudi Arabia to prepare Syrian opposition fighters against ISIS attacks. At an American Enterprise Institute event Thursday, HASC Chairman Rep. Buck McKeon (R-Calif.), said the President called up members of Congress late Tuesday to request the authorization be added to the budget continuing resolution, which was originally set to pass Thursday. The President requested $500 million to begin arming and training “vetted” elements of Syrian opposition forces in hopes of an ouster of Syrian President Bashar Assad, reported Politico. Saudi King Abdullah has offered to host the training center in his country. McKeon said he thinks the request is reasonable and Congress should be able to pass the measure with bipartisan support. “Given the seriousness of the situation, we would give him that authority to take advantage of [Abdullah’s] offer.” McKeon, however, realizes “sometimes things happen in Congress” and his thinking that the authorization should easily pass is not concrete. He noted that many in Congress are unconvinced, and still many others would rather wait until after the midterm elections to act. The “timeliness of all of this is very important,” he said, “but it’s a day-to-day thing.” (Transcript of McKeon’s Speech.)


  28. Just A Citizen says:

    Left Wing Hypocrisy on display once again.

    We must redistribute income because we need to make health care a Right. Why? Because it is the humane and “compassionate” thing to do.

    We must NOT get involved in the civil wars of the middle east. Let them kill each other. Why? Because it is their problem.

    I wonder why the “humane” and “compassion” is only limited to CERTAIN people by those on the left?

  29. Just A Citizen says:

    WHAT IF……………… A more radical fundamentalist version of Islam did gain control of much if not all of the middle east?

    WHAT IF the movement which is the root of ISIS spreads and the Saudi rulers are deposed, parts if not all of Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon go the same way?

    Is this even possible?

    What would the results be if it is possible?

    • JAC

      Such posits are worthless. Human action is not deterministic.

    • It would force the US to tap it’s own oil reserves, which would allow the US to mind their own business and leave the ME alone.

      • Gman,

        So you believe these “new” nations would not trade?

        Heck, under the threat of nuclear war, Russia traded.

        • It is possible they would, and it is possible they wouldn’t, since these so called extremist’s hate the US. The US could put sanctions in place to keep trade from occurring. What would be nice is not relying on the ME for oil and getting OUT of ME business. Although if it were me in charge I would continue to trade freely. But, it’s more likely that an idiot will get elected and screw shit all up anyway 😀

          • “It is possible they would, and it is possible they wouldn’t, since these so called extremist’s hate the US.”

            Money trumps hate. Iraq was more then willing to sell oil to the US, even when US was bombing Iraq.

            “The US could put sanctions in place to keep trade from occurring. ”

            They could, but the US economy would collapse, then they wouldn’t. Sorta self-correcting to the same end. Thus, they wouldn’t do it.

            “What would be nice is not relying on the ME for oil”


  30. Just A Citizen says:

    Consider the various factions in the Middle East. Tribes, ancient peoples, religions and subdivisions thereof, etc. etc. We know the current “Nation States” were artificially created by the west, Britain in particular.

    WHAT IF the people there were allowed to draw their own boundaries? What would it look like.

    Lets first consider the two major, and rival, divisions in Islam. Since it is the most recognized point of internal conflict in the area.


    • One merely need to review history that shows such divisions lived in relative peace for centuries.

      As the European powers intermingled these cultures, there will be time periods where realignment of borders and people will occur. When this is finished, there is no reason the centuries of peace will return (sans outside interference)

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Now lets consider tribal, ethnic and further divisions within Islam.

      Sorry, but you won’t be able to read the map legends. But if you read the titles you will at least grasp how “diverse” some of the are is and how “homogenous” other parts are.


      • The following partial list of “you must suspend disbelief” gaffs, glitches, and hurdles so far:

        1. 1,700 ragtag “jihadis” driving pickup trucks take over half a country — where there are 30,000 opposing troops stationed — and they do it in a couple of weeks. Weird things do happen in Iraq, but really now. Remember Operation Desert Storm, hyped as “The Mother of All Battles?” But that took the entire mechanized U.S. military — Army, Navy, Airforce and Marines. And it took six weeks.

        2. There are 40,000 Yazidi “villagers” trapped and surrounded on Mt. Sinjar, hundreds of miles from the fearsome 1,700 ragtag jihadis. Aside from 40,000 folks being awfully large for a “village,” there’s a problem with getting everyone to go along with anything, especially on short notice. Folks stayed in Fallujah during the U.S. massacre, for example. And there’s the little problem with surrounding a whole mountain — and 40,000 armed people — with only 1,700 ragtag jihadis who are hundreds of miles away, busily taking over the other half of the country. This part of the fantasy was quickly dropped by U.S. Defense Sec. Hagel.

        3. The guy who supposedly beheads the first U.S. reporter — with multiple camera angles — has a marked British accent. And the well-filmed incident echos a similar prominently hyped though peculiar beheading widely featured in 2006.

        4. A guy who calls himself Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi, declares himself chief potentate of what has now been inflated into the dread ISIS “Caliphate” — but via NSA leaks, we discover he’s been trained by Israel’s secret service, the Mossad. And apparently wears expensive western watches.

        5. Also via NSA leaks, we discover that the CIA etc, with whom Mossad often works closely, has an operation named “the hornet’s nest” with the express purpose of attracting all the world’s jihadis to one place.

        These are just the obvious surface problems with the script. You can probably come up with others.

        You do have to give Uncle’s team kudos for attempting to change the acronym from “ISIS” — which is the name of a Goddess — to the less harmonious “ISIL.” Unfortunately, that isn’t working any better than the attempt to change harmless-sounding “Osama” to the harsher “Usama.”

        And yes, it is inappropriate to compare ISIS with the U.S. record of 3.4 million men, women and children killed in Vietnam based on mistakes — and an attack that didn’t happen, ~1 million dead Iraqis and total destruction of their infrastructure and society engineered by at least 935 documented U.S. lies — not to mention 500,000 kids dead by sanctions in pursuit of U.S. foreign policy, etc. ISIS just doesn’t have the resources.

        No, no, I won’t speculate on the interesting possibility that Uncle Sam’s traditional subversion units miscalculated again and “the hornet’s nest” has gotten completely out of hand, taken on a life of it’s own, and really does threaten Western Civilization. However I will suggest that with all the taxpayer money the U.S. MilitaryIndustrialCongressionalComplex spends on war inductions, we deserve more believable fairy tales and a much tighter script.

  31. This is a very interesting chart. It shows the percent of the world’s GDP as represented by Britain, the US, China, and the USSR since 1820 (pre-USSR Russia is considered part of the USSR for some reason, but not post-USSR Russia, and Britain is cut off circa 1950—gee, I wonder why?).

    What is most interesting to me is that the line between Britain and the US intersects circa 1913. Furthermore, look at how America’s steady incline begins to peter out after that time. It’s almost as if a tiny pinprick had been made in a balloon, or a deadly parasite had set upon a healthy host.

  32. Who didn’t see this coming? Not Mr. Marx … 🙂

    • Marx saw no such thing. None of his predictions came true about Capitalism.

      What indeed is that YOUR ilk has polluted the economy to such a degree that the elite continue to expand their power at your loss.

      What you have not been able to understand is that it is your economic system that creates this distortion, not capitalism.

  33. Happy 200th Birthday to the National Anthem! May it be sung proudly for another 200 years 🙂

    • Yep, a British pub song – typical Americans…..

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Hooooooozah! To commemorate I thought we should remember the entire song.

      O say can you see by the dawn’s early light,
      What so proudly we hailed at the twilight’s last gleaming,
      Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight,
      O’er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming?
      And the rockets’ red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
      Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there;
      O say does that star-spangled banner yet wave,
      O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

      On the shore dimly seen through the mists of the deep,
      Where the foe’s haughty host in dread silence reposes,
      What is that which the breeze, o’er the towering steep,
      As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
      Now it catches the gleam of the morning’s first beam,
      In full glory reflected now shines in the stream:
      ‘Tis the star-spangled banner, O! long may it wave
      O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

      And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
      That the havoc of war and the battle’s confusion,
      A home and a country, should leave us no more?
      Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps’ pollution.
      No refuge could save the hireling and slave
      From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:
      And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave,
      O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

      O thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
      Between their loved home and the war’s desolation.
      Blest with vict’ry and peace, may the Heav’n rescued land
      Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation!
      Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
      And this be our motto: “In God is our trust.”
      And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
      O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave

      Now does anyone see the little gem contained within the song? One that is cause for heartburn among the haters.

      • David Skekabim says:

        ” Now does anyone see the little gem contained within the song? One that is cause for heartburn among the haters.”

        Which one, …Lucifer or Appolyon?

        • Just A Citizen says:


          Are they not the same?

          To answer your question directly……..neither.

          Not sure how you came up with those suggestions. Guess it has to do with your mood this fine day.

          • David Skekabim says:

            Look at the original lyrics.

            Venus is Lucifer, The Day Star, The Morning Star, The Bearer of LIGHT …or… The Goddess of Love

            Apollo is The Healing Afternoon Sun God, Master of Plagues …or…Appolyon, The Destroyer

      • So typical American.

        Start a war with a peaceful country, lose it, make a song about how badly the your country is losing the war by pretending a defense from its victim is freedom, then attach it to a British pub song.

        It is absolutely the American style within the world.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          The song in question was not truly a pub song. It was the OFFICIAL song of a gentleman’s club One for aspiring musicians I believe.

          You are thinking of “99 bottles of beer on the wall”. Now that is a pub song.

          • It is truly a pub song. Couldn’t even get an original tune for the nonsense lyrics.

            It’s like penning a national anthem to the Bee Gee’s “Sat. night fever”.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Now lets address the issues you raise.

          Start a war? First to pass a Declaration of War perhaps, but the British made us do it. We had little choice given their behavior (see US pushing Japan to war for further explanation).

          Peaceful country? ROTFLMAO………. A nation that was at war with France, providing weapons and goods to Natives to support their attacks on Americans in the northwest territories, impressing Americans into service on British ships, confiscating American goods to be delivered to France, thus impeding the USA’s RIGHT to trade with whomever it wished.

          Lose it? Doubly ROTFLMAO………….. Can’t wait for you explanation of this claim.

          Defense of freedom? This simply makes no sense so impossible to respond to. Except that it was viewed as the continuation of the first revolution as it was hoped that Britain could be expelled from the continent once and for all. So I guess in that context may a defense of freedom is correct.

          • JAC

            “Start a war? First to pass a Declaration of War perhaps, but the British made us do it.”

            No, they didn’t. It was no less an opportunity to exploit a situation into a war to attempt to take the continent. No one MADE THE US DO IT.

            “Peaceful country? ”
            Canada did not invade US. Canada did nothing to the US. The US invaded Canada.
            Get your history straight, JAC.

            Washington burned. LOL

            • Just A Citizen says:

              CANADA was not a nation then, it was BRITISH TERRITORY.

              Get your history straight BF.

              So to you a war is lost when a battle or a town is lost.

              • It was an autonomous territory. The US did not invade England. They attack Canada for the specific purpose of taking the continent. Your historical knowledge is lacking.

  34. Just A Citizen says:

    Quite often I think we should just hang the damn lawyers. All of them. It would have the side benefit of emptying out Congress.


  35. Just A Citizen says:

    Note that the first example happened under the Bush Administration. Things have only gotten worse since then.


  36. Just A Citizen says:


    Good morning Sir. Frost on the ground in North Idaho this AM.

    So how goes the border activity you were concerned about? Any odd things happen yet?

    Or just the usual flood of bad things.

  37. Just A Citizen says:

    Little piece of history many may not be aware of. NOTICE that the NE States were trying to get approval to push for secession. Kind of blows the modern theory that everyone understood secession was not allowable when they try to paint the Confederacy as “traitors”.

    “The Hartford Convention was a series of meetings from December 15, 1814 – January 5, 1815 in Hartford, Connecticut, United States, in which New England Federalists met to discuss their grievances concerning the ongoing War of 1812 and the political problems arising from the federal government’s increasing power. Despite radical outcries among Federalists for New England secession and a separate peace with Great Britain, moderates outnumbered them and extreme proposals were not a major focus of the debate.[1]

    The convention discussed removing the three-fifths compromise which gave slave states more power in Congress and requiring a two-thirds super majority in Congress for the admission of new states, declarations of war, and laws restricting trade. The Federalists also discussed their grievances with the Louisiana Purchase and the Embargo of 1807. However, weeks after the convention’s end, news of Major General Andrew Jackson’s overwhelming victory in New Orleans swept over the Northeast, discrediting and disgracing the Federalists, resulting in their elimination as a major national political force.”

    The irony here is that the loss of the Federalists as a major party probably retarded the growth of the Federal Govt from what it would have been otherwise. A short reprieve until Mr. Lincoln comes along, but long enough to establish the SMALL GOVT culture and institutional memory in the Country.

    We often overlook the “big govt” growth spurt that occurred in the first decade because is was bounded by “VDLG”.

%d bloggers like this: