ISIS

[DigitalPigSnuggler]

I never did quite understand to hostility to the defensive SDI, unless they truly wanted us defenseless.  Look at Israel's 'Iron Dome' - that comes straight out of SDI technology.  Does that look 'unworkable' to you?  Should it be denounced as some 'Star Wars' fantasy?

Is there any reason why, when faced with something you don't understand, that you don't simply research it and find the answer rather than simply blowing it off as some kind of failing on the part of the left wing?

There is no such thing as a "defensive" SDI.  By its very nature, it enables first-strike capability.  Therefore, it is inherently destabilizing to the MAD deterrent factor.  Nixon realized this when he pushed SALT I which led to the ABM treaty of 1972.  Yes, Reagan claimed it was going to be for defensive capabilities only, but if it was Brezhnev who was saying it, would the USA rely on his word?

In addition, the technology just isn't there.  This is a highly complex subject, and there were many different methods proposed.  The introduction of MIRV (missiles with multiple warheads) basically took ABMs off the table.  A MIRV missile has to be disabled during the boost phase, and there is just not enough time to get a kinetic energy weapon (ABM or otherwise) to the missile in flight.  Alternatives included placing lasers into orbit that would fire and disable the missiles.  Among the many problems there was that no one could figure out how to achieve anything but a small fraction of the power required for the laser to function effectively.

The Iron Dome program absolutely does NOT come out of SDI technology.  The challenges of disabling MIRV-equipped ballistic missiles and short-range rockets with conventional explosives are completely different things.  This technology was used way back during the first Gulf War by the USA, if you recall.  You obviously don't have the slightest idea how these two systems function to suggest that Iron Dome "proves" SDI technology in some way.

Suggestion: try educating yourself on the topic.  You'll be surprised at how knowledge makes everything much more understandable and obviates the need to blame leftist pacifist tree-huggers from Berkeley for everything you don't understand.  You might even find the experience so satisfying that you'll apply the same technique again and again.  Wouldn't that be fun?

[NowhereInTime]

You are unaware of all those anti-nuclear protests, marches, demonstrations in the 1980s - the decade before the USSR collapsed?  All those op-ed pieces?  The more reactionary members of Congress making speeches and trying to attach amendments to legislation (like my own Congressman at the time, Ron 'Red' Dellums)?  Insisting Reagan give in to Gorby and his predecessors to their lopsided proposals?  Mockingly calling our missile defense system 'Star Wars'?

You are unaware of all that?  You think it's all a well crafted lie?

Not very well crafted.  I grew up on the East Coast during the Reagan era.  Folks on my side were protesting nuclear proliferation, but as a world wide problem.  I do not recall any demonstrations calling for unilateral disarmament. 
The Soviets were living on borrowed time; centralized planning had destroyed their economy and their dreams of empire were suctioned up in the mountains of Afghanistan. (Sound familiar?)
What breaks my heart is that Reagan, beholden to financially interested parties, didn't explore a possible arms reduction treaty offered by "Gorby" because he was into so many pockets to push SDI.   

I lived in Berkeley CA at the time.  I personally saw the morons standing on the Cal Berkeley campus lawn along Oxford Street holding up their signs for passing cars to see, demanding that we 'Disarm', and 'No Nukes'.  They were so motivated they gave up their weekends to stand out there.

Here's the problem; the said "Disarm" and "No nukes", but not "US Give up your defenses" or "Only USA disarm".  It was meant for the world.
So, people motivated for peace to the point where they gave up their weekends you call "morons".  I call them "patriots".

There were demonstrations all the time in Oakland, and especially in San Francisco, on all sorts of issues - unilateral disarmament and anti-nuclear weapons were a continually recurring highlighted theme. 

I never did quite understand to hostility to the defensive SDI, unless they truly wanted us defenseless.  Look at Israel's 'Iron Dome' - that comes straight out of SDI technology.  Does that look 'unworkable' to you?  Should it be denounced as some 'Star Wars' fantasy?

No, but now Israel thinks themselves invulnerable from substantial harm.  That was one of the many criticisms about SDI; how long would it take for us to believe that we would "win" a nuclear war with the Soviets?

[PB the Deplorable]

... Here's the problem; the said "Disarm" and "No nukes", but not "US Give up your defenses" or "Only USA disarm".  It was meant for the world.

So, people motivated for peace to the point where they gave up their weekends you call "morons".  I call them "patriots"...

I never heard them say that, not ever.  They wanted the US to disarm, and were with the USSR on every point.

Those were US flags they were burning, not flags of the Soviets.  Hell, they were waving those.

[NowhereInTime]

...Same concept as the coming likely dollar crisis you like to mock...

I am not the only one to call BS on "the coming dollar crisis"

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/22/opinion/paul-krugman-hawks-crying-wolf.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=c-column-top-span-region&region=c-column-top-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region

[NowhereInTime]

I never heard them say that, not ever.  They wanted the US to disarm, and were with the USSR on every point.

Those were US flags they were burning, not flags of the Soviets.  Hell, they were waving those.

Please, with the millions of images on line, show me one picture where Americans are waving Soviet flags and burning American flags.  Just one.

[PB the Deplorable]

Is there any reason why, when faced with something you don't understand, that you don't simply research it and find the answer rather than simply blowing it off as some kind of failing on the part of the left wing?

There is no such thing as a "defensive" SDI.  By its very nature, it enables first-strike capability.  Therefore, it is inherently destabilizing to the MAD deterrent factor...

The Iron Dome program absolutely does NOT come out of SDI technology...

Suggestion: try educating yourself on the topic...

I didn't say the Iron Dome is SDI, or a next generation of it.  Just that it uses certain technology from the SDI programs.  Meaning that wasn't the 'Star Wars' boondoggle the Libs insisted it was. 

Sure it could have been used as an offensive weapon.  But so what, it was our weapon and it was for missile defense.  Would you prefer the Mutual Assured Destruction you referenced?  Or unilateral disarmament?

[NowhereInTime]

I didn't say the Iron Dome is SDI, or a next generation of it.  Just that it uses certain technology from the SDI programs.  Meaning that wasn't the 'Star Wars' boondoggle the Libs insisted it was. 

Sure it could have been used as an offensive weapon.  But so what, it was our weapon and it was for missile defense.  Would you prefer the Mutual Assured Destruction you referenced?  Or unilateral disarmament?

Oh, stop with "unilateral disarmament" already.  Nobody called for that.

And you want to look at Iron Dome and say "SDI was a success!"   (But Obamacare a failure, by the by, how specious can you get?!?)

[DigitalPigSnuggler]

I didn't say the Iron Dome is SDI, or a next generation of it.  Just that it uses certain technology from the SDI programs. 

Yes, I realize that you said that.  And you are wrong.  If you think otherwise, then explain, with specificity, what "certain technology" it uses from SDI programs.

Meaning that wasn't the 'Star Wars' boondoggle the Libs insisted it was. 

What is the matter with you, anyway?  You're claiming the equivalent that if someone knows how to build a house, then they know how to build the Twin Towers.  The two things (SDI and Iron Dome) share only a superficial relationship.  The technical challenges standing in the way of a functioning SDI program are immense, publicly documented, and well understood.  And that won't change just because you jam your fingers in your ears and start humming.

Sure it could have been used as an offensive weapon.  But so what, it was our weapon and it was for missile defense.  Would you prefer the Mutual Assured Destruction you referenced?  Or unilateral disarmament?

You said you couldn't understand the opposition to a DEFENSIVE system, and I explained why there is no such thing.  Now you want to change the subject.

What exactly is your phobia about learning, anyway?  Does it scare you that some things in the world are actually different than what you believe?

Reagan used SDI brilliantly to begin the breakdown of the USSR.  I can tell you my thoughts about that, if you are interested.

[bateman]

[Quick Karl]

The technical challenges standing in the way of a functioning SDI program are immense, publicly documented, and well understood.

The technical challenges of going to the moon in the 60's was immense too; thank God you weren't in charge.

Leave the challenging things in life to the big boys and stay focused on being a malcontent.

[DigitalPigSnuggler]

The technical challenges of going to the moon in the 60's was immense too; thank God you weren't in charge.

You are the most ignorant person I have ever met.  This is something you can check out for yourself, or you could if you didn't have a 2nd grade education.

[onan]

Too bad there aren't more folks like West of the Rockies here, and too bad a few of the "intellectual giants" on the communist side of the debates are quick to critique an opponent when he uses the same tactics as his friends, but sits there in silence when his friends fling shit - you know who you are Onan...

If you look back over my responses to you... you will see I have agreed with you a few times. If you take the time, you will see I post less in the politics threads. And that is directly due to your presence. You really did engender the downward spiral of what is no longer even discussion. It is to the point that there are one or two cogent posts intersperced with what can only be classified as "dark" graffiti.

From my point of view, you dislike anyone proving you have little understanding of the subjects you dislike and call them some variation of liberal/communistic idiocies. I really only challenge you when you go off on medical issues, of which, face it, you are clueless. You are led only by bias and what appears to be hatred. Motivated by your "love" for the 40's USA.

I realize I am biased, I also realize that you are much more so, and never attempt any civility to anyone that disagrees. Again, since your appearance here, that behavior has been your only method of operation. Most of us, when on other threads have a fun time and laugh with each other. Even PaperBoy, with whom I disagree often, is about as funny as you can get. I wish you had presented a tenth of that. But you are vacant unless you can insult. And honestly, reciprocity is about as natural as breathing. You seem to expect adulation from all, but never offer any kind of tolerance for those that differ with you.

NoWhereInTime, is  very clever and much more intelligent than you could hope to be. But thanks to your presence, his posts have devolved into insults. And I find you partially responsible for that. Had you ever been adult enough to realize we are all on the same elevator, perhaps you would have played a different game. Even this post will be something for you to insult and if I am lucky you will find a way to insinuate me with a tampon.

[Quick Karl]

If you look back over my responses to you... you will see I have agreed with you a few times. If you take the time, you will see I post less in the politics threads. And that is directly due to your presence. You really did engender the downward spiral of what is no longer even discussion. It is to the point that there are one or two cogent posts intersperced with what can only be classified as "dark" graffiti.

From my point of view, you dislike anyone proving you have little understanding of the subjects you dislike and call them some variation of liberal/communistic idiocies. I really only challenge you when you go off on medical issues, of which, face it, you are clueless. You are led only by bias and what appears to be hatred. Motivated by your "love" for the 40's USA.

I realize I am biased, I also realize that you are much more so, and never attempt any civility to anyone that disagrees. Again, since your appearance here, that behavior has been your only method of operation. Most of us, when on other threads have a fun time and laugh with each other. Even PaperBoy, with whom I disagree often, is about as funny as you can get. I wish you had presented a tenth of that. But you are vacant unless you can insult. And honestly, reciprocity is about as natural as breathing. You seem to expect adulation from all, but never offer any kind of tolerance for those that differ with you.

NoWhereInTime, is  very clever and much more intelligent than you could hope to be. But thanks to your presence, his posts have devolved into insults. And I find you partially responsible for that. Had you ever been adult enough to realize we are all on the same elevator, perhaps you would have played a different game. Even this post will be something for you to insult and if I am lucky you will find a way to insinuate me with a tampon.

Onan,

You are responsible for  what you post, as is nitwit  - any mature adult would realize that. To attempt to place the responsibility for what you or nitwit posts on my shoulders is a microcosm for the lack of character that is precisely why I treat the both of you the way I do.

Grow up.

[onan]

Onan,

You are responsible for  what you post, as is nitwit  - any mature adult would realize that. To attempt to place the responsibility for what you or nitwit posts on my shoulders is a microcosm for the lack of character that is precisely why I treat the both of you the way I do.

Grow up.

We have been over this, read past posts. See where the insults start.

We can go back and forth all day long.

If you want to stop the shit, then stop the shit. You suggest growing up, yet your maturity is always suspect. I agree it does become rote and easier than thinking.

I wonder if you are even capable of having a controversial conversation that isn't vitriolic. 

[Little Hater]

As a (mostly) bystander without a dog in the fight, I'll say that when QK first appeared here, his posts, regardless of what you think of his politics, were pretty much devoid of personal insults aimed at other members. If "who started it" matters, I think NIT and DPS (with a nod toward YP) were first to start slinging mud. QK started responding to this ugliness in kind (his mistake), and here we are today. I think most here agree with FTF and would like to see these forums be about rational political debate.

[Rudolf Zlabinger]

As I see a lot of self reflecting and nearly nothing to contribute to terminate Is´s Caliphate I summarized at least what I wrote already in my frustration, that there was nobody than Obama and the poor Peschmergas troops hardly trying to resist, and the rest was pararalized:




It´s high time for the international community to stop this threat immediately. Its not

Obamas task to do that alone, Pope says its UNO´s responsibility (they would be too late),

I say, let a couple of 100 Chinese soldiers come to do this job, they know very well, how to

do, better than ISIS can imagine.




Then our only chance is to learn from another 5000 year old culture, the Chinese, they

continuously renewed their vitality anew and anew and today seems me the only people to

give this crowd of murderers what they need, more cruelty, as they can imagine and

sustain, they screaming will run for their lives, I am sure.





So there is no time for trade offs. Everybody able to has to elimit Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi

ASAP, and all of his successors too. I hope there is some man or special unit with the

power to hit this Kalif. The ISIS people are the secondary problem, weakened being without

head, they could be defeated easier.


Ceterum censeo Baghdadi esse delendum! (free by Cato), and that quickly and ASAP.
That's my ultima ratio and my Amen for this wretched story, we had stopped already from the beginning, if the world where a unit of free and loyal partners. 

[Quick Karl]

As a (mostly) bystander without a dog in the fight, I'll say that when QK first appeared here, his posts, regardless of what you think of his politics, were pretty much devoid of personal insults aimed at other members. If "who started it" matters, I think NIT and DPS (with a nod toward YP) were first to start slinging mud. QK started responding to this ugliness in kind (his mistake), and here we are today. I think most here agree with FTF and would like to see these forums be about rational political debate.

Thank you.

[heater]

were first to start slinging mud.

that's my job.

[NowhereInTime]

As a (mostly) bystander without a dog in the fight, I'll say that when QK first appeared here, his posts, regardless of what you think of his politics, were pretty much devoid of personal insults aimed at other members. If "who started it" matters, I think NIT and DPS (with a nod toward YP) were first to start slinging mud. QK started responding to this ugliness in kind (his mistake), and here we are today. I think most here agree with FTF and would like to see these forums be about rational political debate.

You know, not to belabor this, because this is high school antics, but here is the first post I ever had from Quick Karl.  He interceded in a dispute Paper*Boy and I were having about the relevancy of conservatism.  Fine.  Open forum, unmoderated board, no problem.
If you read my response to P*B it was, while heated (and maybe a bit snarky), it was devoid of direct insult but did call him out on evidence and on the fallacy of his assertion.  This, then, was my personal introduction to Quick Karl:

When your answer is to insult the genuine beliefs and concerns of your fellow citizen, you become an asshole, with no legitimacy.

I suggest that that you, in fact, READ, The Federalist, and then, The Creation of The American Republic by Gordon S. Wood. You might then actually have a more comprehensive idea of what the Founders actually thought about when they organized Our Country, instead of getting it from MSNBC, and I can guarandamntee you it will surprise you, because from the sound of your vitriol, it is obvious that you are terribly misinformed.

I wonder how loudly you would cry if the Democrats did what you accuse the Republicans of doing (gerrymandering, as if the pious Democrats have never and will never do it), the underlying suggestion being that it is illegal, which, it is not. It may work against your whims, but there are many checks and balances in Our form of Constitutional Republic that are specifically intended to have that precise effect - so that we don't wind up with an oppressive despotic majority, or vindictive tyrannical leader, much like we are very near to experiencing, today.

We are specifically NOT supposed to be a country wherein a 'majority' gets to shit on the pursuits of happiness of a minority. That kind of Government is what you might find in Iran, Russia, or China. And save all your dredging up the mistakes we have made as a country and society, in the past, because many of US have fought very hard, and many have died, to correct those misdeeds, to the point of even being raped financially by hucksters for it.

We've ALWAYS tried to correct our wrongs, until very recently.

And I am impervious to Red Herring arguments, but you can call me names if it helps (see first sentence).

The very first line starts with an "if/then" argument that concludes I am an "asshole".

Then he implies I lack education because I neither agree nor particularly care about his view of the Federalist papers (because I "watch MSNBC" - nobody watches MSNBC).

Then it's an accusation of hypocrisy because I wouldn't call out Democrats for gerrymandering AND there's a swipe at the President as a "vindictive tyrannical leader".  I have publicly stated my support for the President (though I agree he isn't perfect, he isn't a "tyrant" either).

And for the record, he actually invites me to insult him.  Ok, so I am sure he really didn't mean it and I'm not an imbecile.

But I was personally offended. 

You see, Little Hater, every time another conservative wades into this swamp we call the politics thread, they come with the paternalistic view that liberals are, at best, misguided children or, at worst, neo-Stalinist commies bent on impoverishing the wealthy.  The entirety of their opinion stems from these assertions which is neither a) correct or b) honest.
Specious linkage to Mao, Pol Pot, Kim Jung Un, Lenin, Stalin, whomever, is offensive and wholly incorrect.  What liberals want for America is peace, justice, and equality of opportunity.  We do not care about "exceptionalism", "class", "race", or "faith" as determiners of whom is better than who.  Not important to us.
And we do not believe in denying people's dreams.

So, we get to the point.  You, Little Hater, like Sci-Fi Author, Unquenchable Angst, Pate, Paladin 1991, and a few others I can't remember, have presented yourselves initially as "not having a dog in the fight" yet do not hesitate to conclude (like Jazmunda did, out of the blue) that it's only the lefties that do the slinging around here. Or that I am the original sinner.

Except that I have seen your posts and you, too, are a conservative.  Again, fine, but please don't come here as "objective observer" and say it's all on me.  Neither true, nor fair.

Peace.

[Quick Karl]

That "first post" to nitwit -- was in response to nothing; I just pulled it out of thin air to hurl an insult at him because he was just the first innocent bystander I saw that day...

Now he will get mad at me again for pointing out his bullshit, and he'll call me a child molester and try to say something that will hurt my feelings relative to my childhood.

A real intellectual giant I tell ya!

[NowhereInTime]

That "first post" to nitwit -- was in response to nothing; I just pulled it out of thin air to hurl an insult at him because he was just the first innocent bystander I saw that day...

Now he will get mad at me again for pointing out his bullshit, and he'll call me a child molester and try to say something that will hurt my feelings relative to my childhood.

A real intellectual giant I tell ya!

You know, Quick Karl, the truth is the truth.  An insult is an insult.  By the way, you're not calling my "bullshit" because you just acknowledged the truth.

And, no, I will not call you a child molester anymore. Or mock your unfortunate childhood situation.  This isn't my forum, these aren't my threads.

Your arrogance brings out the worst in me.  Your behavior is appalling.  I will continue to say, and I do truly believe, your mindset is what's really killing the American dream.

[NowhereInTime]

A real intellectual giant I tell ya!

Compared to so many who have come and gone, and to many who post here, I am an intellectual light weight.  I write from passion of believe, not conviction of intellectual superiority.

The difference is that I respect enough of the posters here to try to come in with facts to support my stances rather than assertion based on preconceived notions.

[DigitalPigSnuggler]

I think NIT and DPS (with a nod toward YP) were first to start slinging mud.

I went back and reviewed my posting history.  My first exchange with Karl was in a thread talking about gun control.  In his second post to me, before I ever did any "mud slinging," he called me "stupid" and an "asslick."  I certainly bear half of the responsibility for our tempestuous relationship since then, but you're wrong when you say that I started it with him.  He recruits people to argue with him.  As he admits above, he insults people at random, just because.  He has issues.

[DigitalPigSnuggler]

I didn't say the Iron Dome is SDI, or a next generation of it.  Just that it uses certain technology from the SDI programs. 

Still waiting for you to admit that Iron Dome doesn't use "certain technology" from the SDI programs.

Not everything you read on conservative blogs is true.  Maybe someday you'll realize this.

[PB the Deplorable]

First, he's a lib who does everything based on emotion, now, to suit your purposes, he's "one ice cold SOB"?
As your boy Bill Bennett always put it "Which one is it?"

Oh, I don't think the ruling elites in the Democrat Party do anything based on emotion. 

I think the average Democrat voter does when it comes to politics.

[PB the Deplorable]

I am not the only one to call BS on "the coming dollar crisis"

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/22/opinion/paul-krugman-hawks-crying-wolf.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=c-column-top-span-region&region=c-column-top-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region

Printing and borrowing a trillion or so a year when the interest rate is microscopic is a great idea. 

Why didn't anyone think of this before.  Heck, why not eliminate taxes and just print and borrow. 

It embarrasses me that it took Barrack Obama and Paul Krugman to figure this out. 

[NowhereInTime]

Printing and borrowing a trillion or so a year when the interest rate is microscopic is a great idea.  Why didn't anyone think of this before.  Heck, why not eliminate taxes and just print and borrow. 

It embarrasses me that it took Barrack Obama and Paul Krugman to figure this out.

Well, here's the other side of the coin, we could increase taxes to cover all of this spending...

[NowhereInTime]

Oh, I don't think the ruling elites in the Democrat Party do anything based on emotion. 

I think the average Democrat voter does when it comes to politics.

I think both parties specialize in ginning up their respective bases quite well.
I will give the conservatives credit for being more fastidious when it comes to exercising their voting rights with consistency.  I wish everyone would be as responsible.

[PB the Deplorable]

Well, here's the other side of the coin, we could increase taxes to cover all of this spending...

Or we could cut some of it. 

[NowhereInTime]

Or we could cut some of it.

I'd like to cut a lot of it.