Missy89:


Read what you quoted again. I was talking to appleyard.

Nobody wants war. But it is a necessity in a very complex world we live in.That is the reality.

Feeling good about yourself is all there is to peace activism and appeasement. I wouldn't expect you to know better.

Lucasbalo:
In your world war is a necessity. Whao, you live in your own world if you believe that junk. I sure don't want America to be the police officer of the world. War is absolutely junk and the only people benefiting from it is MIC and the investors like Trump who has shares in Reaton that makes those missilles raining on Syria. Way to go America. Americans don't need to get back in that mess in that God forsaken part of the world. I rather let my money goes into fixing America not bombing people all over. Since you love war so much, the rooster will come home to roost for you in North Korea. Get ready for nuclear holocaust.

Missy89:


Yes it is necessary when dealing with evil. Hitler was defeated by a gun not placards with " we want peace "on them.

Missy89:


Yes it is necessary when dealing with evil. Hitler was defeated by a gun not placards with " we want peace "on them.

If there is a nuclear holocaust, Do you think it will only kill me? Lol

Lucasbalo:
I hope they send you to the battlefield and see how you will hold up. I have two that are my close family members that fought in Iraq and Afghanistan and one of them was even awarded a Purple Heart. His tales will break anyone's heart but you are cushy in your pacific island paradise and you can be jingoistic all you want. Thank God I don't have any blood in the military anymore. Wishing you a good fight when they ship you off to Syria or wherever the next war is since you love blood so much.

Missy89:


We both know why you are mad at Trump.

You expected a different foreign policy and even said something about the cosmic order electing him. Now that you have realized that won't happen, you are back to your pootine ass eating mode.

The strange part is that you have aligned yourself with people like Lucas and his liberal friends who wants to punish your kremlin masters for the election

oyb:




lets go easy on the revisionism. Americans were in idgaf mode until pearl harbor
the jews were on their own
America First things.

America became world police after WWII.

also, be careful how you define evil. america had absolutely no problem with chemical weapons in the 80s when saddam was running the US proxy war against iran. they had no issues with chemical weapons when saddam was bombing kurds.

as to a nuclear holocaust - it has always been a game of Mutually assured destruction. the arsenal is a dont Bleep with me deterrent. the problem now is we have one baby in the white house and another in north korea.

Appleyard:


Lmao! Nobody expect anything to change radically in US Foreign Policy. My support for a Trump presidency was based on the fact that America's military interventionism globally would experience some drawback, by weakening the foothold of the establishment; which is the reason they hate him that much. His election was signed, sealed by the cosmic to buy time for the souls that are still outside of redemption. ( I know you won't understand; only spiritualist does. ) Otherwise, he won't change anything. The fate of the United States has already been sealed way before Trump was born.

Stop being naive. I have not align with anybody. My point was very clear: the recent Washington authorised missile strike on Syria was a Trump act, a ruse to digress pressure from his administration in the face of Russiangate claims and so on. Except you can explain how you send a message to your enemy by firing at them after making sure they are not in the line of fire prior to an alert from you before the attack took place.

It make sense to you, but it doesn't make any sense to logical minds like me. That's the difference Missy...

Zoharariel:


Baba, I am even becoming more afraid for my life by the day because I just can't imagine what would happen if 1 day she pisses me off & I kick in her in her tummy

Although If she pulls a Baretta or a Smith & Wesson; as a Moskow-trained irunmole, me sef go pull a Makarov but the problem is who will separate us?

And my late Mother warned me seriously that I must only marry a virtuous & humble lady but this geh called Missy is far from being humble & virtuous - seeing the way she is yearning to kick the ass of a 400lbs man - although that 1 sef deserve am

This is Y I have been looking for the easiest way to deposit just 5ml of my gamete into her womb - via her “Cuchara, Panocha, Pupusa” before running back to my village in Ijebu, but I still haven't figured out the most appropriate venue for this erotic acrobatic sexual adventure.

If only Lucas could help me lure her to his house in Chicago while he sends his wife on a compulsory 3-day vacation in Hawaii.

Missy89:


The point of the whole attack is a warning to Assad. The DoD even said : military planners took precautions to minimize risk to Russian or Syrian personnel at the airfield.

I dont think the idea was to destroy the whole area or kill troops. The most important thing is that for the first time, Assad was attacked directly by the US. I heard from a VERY reliable source that the S400 failed because appleyard forgot to give the Syrians the password of the Magrav technology

Missy89:


That's the only line you have been using since the first page. Your family member was awarded a Purple Heart not you. So what should I do with that piece of information?

You love peace so much, why are you not in Syria with you "one love" t-shirt? Btw I am no longer serving.

Lucasbalo:
I don't give a damn about Syria or Middle East. America is my concern. Let the people and the countries in that part of the cursed world manage their own mess. By you advocating for war , you not being in the military is not an excuse because you can go and reenlist and s see how much of a warrior you stare are. With all the things wrong in America, war is what gets your mojo kicking.

Lucasbalo:
I don't give a damn about Syria or Middle East. America is my concern. Let the people and the countries in that part of the cursed world manage their own mess. By you advocating for war , you not being in the military is not an excuse because you can go and reenlist as see how much of a warrior you stare are. With all the things wrong in America, war is what gets your mojo kicking.

Missy89:


By advocating for peace, you not giving a damn is not an excuse because you can go raise your placards in Raqqa and demand peace. With everything wrong with the world, appeasement and withdrawal is what gets your mojo kicking

Missy89:


By advocating for peace, you not giving a damn is not an excuse because you can go raise your placards in Raqqa and demand peace. With everything wrong with the world, appeasement and withdrawal is what gets your mojo kicking

Missy89:


By advocating for peace, you not giving a damn is not an excuse because you can go raise your placards in Raqqa and demand peace. With everything wrong with the world, appeasement and withdrawal is what gets your mojo kicking

Gyalchester:


Dont trigger my uncle ruckus or he will fvck you senseless.

raumdeuter:


After 9-11 attacks we should have sent out flowers and white handkerchief

Lucasbalo:
I never criticize our getting involved in Afghanistan my problem was Iraq and what's evolving in Syria and North Korea. Since you love war so much, why don't you go and enlist like your mentor Missy did and that will be good for you instead of moving from city to city in America.

Lucasbalo:
No I will leave the Fvking part of that to the Pu*sy grabbing conman in the WH.

So you love sharing, you and trump can tag team the tranny.

Missy89:


Since you love peace so much, why did you vote for Hillary?

LordReed:


Speculation is that this a ploy to pave way for lifting of US sanctions on Russia as a show of good faith, de-escalate the situation and avoid WW3.

If that happens (if it is even suggested as a course of action) I think there'll be no doubt that Trump and Putin are bed fellows and have treated us to a bit of military and political theater. LoL

oyb:




lets go easy on the revisionism. Americans were in idgaf mode until pearl harbor
the jews were on their own
America First things.

America became world police after WWII.

also, be careful how you define evil. america had absolutely no problem with chemical weapons in the 80s when saddam was running the US proxy war against iran. they had no issues with chemical weapons when saddam was bombing kurds.

as to a nuclear holocaust - it has always been a game of Mutually assured destruction. the arsenal is a dont Bleep with me deterrent. the problem now is we have one baby in the white house and another in north korea.

Appleyard:


Lmao! Nobody expect anything to change radically in US Foreign Policy. My support for a Trump presidency was based on the fact that America's military interventionism globally would experience some drawback, by weakening the foothold of the establishment; which is the reason they hate him that much. His election was signed, sealed by the cosmic to buy time for the souls that are still outside of redemption. ( I know you won't understand; only spiritualist does. ) Otherwise, he won't change anything. The fate of the United States has already been sealed way before Trump was born.

Stop being naive. I have not align with anybody. My point was very clear: the recent Washington authorised missile strike on Syria was a Trump act, a ruse to digress pressure from his administration in the face of Russiangate claims and so on. Except you can explain how you send a message to your enemy by firing at them after making sure they are not in the line of fire prior to an alert from you before the attack took place.

It make sense to you, but it doesn't make any sense to logical minds like me. That's the difference Missy...

mojeer678:


I prefer this version better:

Syria update
There are many theories floating around about syria. Some people are saying it was an act of desperation by Trump. Others are saying it was a chess move, where he tested Russia's S-300 and S-400 missile systems. Others think as I do, and that he caved to the neocons. WHATEVER THE SITUATION, HERE IS THE OUTCOME SO FAR:

Inexplicably, 60 missiles were fired, 1 fell into the ocean, 59 headed to Syria successfully, and 23 made it. That's bad. If Russia's S-300 and S-400 missile systems caused that, IT IS BAD.

People don't seem to understand that you don't need a 100 percent kill rate on something like a cruise missile to have a weapons system like the S-400 be a success. I'd gauge outrageous success at a 30 percent hit rate on something like a cruise missile. That would be an AMAZING success. If twice that was lost to Russian missile defenses, it represents total doom for the United States. Why would that be? The answer is easy:

If Russia has a missile system so good it can nail cruise missiles better than half the time, it also means that it will have an extremely high success rate while shooting down aircraft. Aircraft are not expendable single use weapons. To make it worthwhile to have an aircraft it has to fly successfully many many times, at least 100 times. If there is something out there that will, on average, make it possible to fly an aircraft only twice you might as well give up before you even start.

Obviously we don't know if the super high failure rate was due to Russian missile defenses or if it was due to good Russian jamming, or if it was due to cruise missiles that were crap. I doubt they were crap. But we do now know that Russia is not a helpless victim in waiting.

If Russian defenses took out so many missiles, then the obvious best Russian retaliatory/defensive tactic would be:

1. Nuke the warships, and 2. Take the aircraft out with advanced missiles.

America without question has the world's most powerful navy. In fact, America's navy is twice or more as capable as the entire rest of the world combined. But nukes are a serious problem for warships, I'd call the U.S. Navy little more than a way to project power into nations that don't have nuclear weapons. Up against Russia, the navy is toast. Even Kim Jong could probably take the navy out. And the U.S. Navy is such a menace that not nuking it if you could would be the real life manifestation of "Dumb and Dumber". I doubt Russia would be stupid enough to just let the Navy stick a hot fire poker wherever it wanted.

Going up against the U.S. Navy without a nuclear response available would be equal to getting nuked. A nuclear response would be the only correct answer. Therefore, Trump had better keep the navy parked and do nothing against Russia because only one thing will happen if Trump sends a significant portion of the navy to fight Russia: 165 or more U.S. warplanes will be in the air, and have no place to land.

I do not think a war against Russia will be winnable
I don't think a war against China would be winnable. Probably not even India. You might have luck against Pakistan. You would win against North Korea after significant losses. And the answer to why is easy: You can't send a navy against decent quality nukes. Pakistan has very crappy nukes so they are "iffy". But I'd bet Kim Jong could score between 3 and 7 Nimitz class aircraft carriers all by himself. China would eat them all, plus a lot of the U.S. mainland. Russia would be at least 5x worse than China.

The bottom line is that it does not matter how many toys you have, or what your budget is when the people you are attacking have nukes. Nukes are the great equalizer, 20 equal the entire U.S. Navy, that cost 1000 or more times as much. When Russia has many thousands, screwing with that is idiot's play. There is no conceivable way you'd not get hit enough to wipe you out, even if you had a 99 percent kill rate against them.

Let's hope cool heads prevail. But there is a problem: They probably will not, because Israel could care less about America, and has a zombie tap right into America's brain. Israel won't mind poking the bear as long as they can fully put the blame on someone else. THAT is the real danger, don't count on cool heads prevailing when evil people have motives and can cause others to die while accomplishing their goals on behalf of evil.

Missy89:



That's easy.

Doctrine of proportionality

mojeer678:


I prefer this version better:

Syria update
There are many theories floating around about syria. Some people are saying it was an act of desperation by Trump. Others are saying it was a chess move, where he tested Russia's S-300 and S-400 missile systems. Others think as I do, and that he caved to the neocons. WHATEVER THE SITUATION, HERE IS THE OUTCOME SO FAR:

Inexplicably, 60 missiles were fired, 1 fell into the ocean, 59 headed to Syria successfully, and 23 made it. That's bad. If Russia's S-300 and S-400 missile systems caused that, IT IS BAD.

So much sense. so much sense.

People don't seem to understand that you don't need a 100 percent kill rate on something like a cruise missile to have a weapons system like the S-400 be a success. I'd gauge outrageous success at a 30 percent hit rate on something like a cruise missile. That would be an AMAZING success. If twice that was lost to Russian missile defenses, it represents total doom for the United States. Why would that be? The answer is easy:

If Russia has a missile system so good it can nail cruise missiles better than half the time, it also means that it will have an extremely high success rate while shooting down aircraft. Aircraft are not expendable single use weapons. To make it worthwhile to have an aircraft it has to fly successfully many many times, at least 100 times. If there is something out there that will, on average, make it possible to fly an aircraft only twice you might as well give up before you even start.

Obviously we don't know if the super high failure rate was due to Russian missile defenses or if it was due to good Russian jamming, or if it was due to cruise missiles that were crap. I doubt they were crap. But we do now know that Russia is not a helpless victim in waiting.

If Russian defenses took out so many missiles, then the obvious best Russian retaliatory/defensive tactic would be:

1. Nuke the warships, and 2. Take the aircraft out with advanced missiles.

America without question has the world's most powerful navy. In fact, America's navy is twice or more as capable as the entire rest of the world combined. But nukes are a serious problem for warships, I'd call the U.S. Navy little more than a way to project power into nations that don't have nuclear weapons. Up against Russia, the navy is toast. Even Kim Jong could probably take the navy out. And the U.S. Navy is such a menace that not nuking it if you could would be the real life manifestation of "Dumb and Dumber". I doubt Russia would be stupid enough to just let the Navy stick a hot fire poker wherever it wanted.

Going up against the U.S. Navy without a nuclear response available would be equal to getting nuked. A nuclear response would be the only correct answer. Therefore, Trump had better keep the navy parked and do nothing against Russia because only one thing will happen if Trump sends a significant portion of the navy to fight Russia: 165 or more U.S. warplanes will be in the air, and have no place to land.

I do not think a war against Russia will be winnable
I don't think a war against China would be winnable. Probably not even India. You might have luck against Pakistan. You would win against North Korea after significant losses. And the answer to why is easy: You can't send a navy against decent quality nukes. Pakistan has very crappy nukes so they are "iffy". But I'd bet Kim Jong could score between 3 and 7 Nimitz class aircraft carriers all by himself. China would eat them all, plus a lot of the U.S. mainland. Russia would be at least 5x worse than China.

The bottom line is that it does not matter how many toys you have, or what your budget is when the people you are attacking have nukes. Nukes are the great equalizer, 20 equal the entire U.S. Navy, that cost 1000 or more times as much. When Russia has many thousands, screwing with that is idiot's play. There is no conceivable way you'd not get hit enough to wipe you out, even if you had a 99 percent kill rate against them.

Let's hope cool heads prevail. But there is a problem: They probably will not, because Israel could care less about America, and has a zombie tap right into America's brain. Israel won't mind poking the bear as long as they can fully put the blame on someone else. THAT is the real danger, don't count on cool heads prevailing when evil people have motives and can cause others to die while accomplishing their goals on behalf of evil.