A grunt's take on Petraeus.

Well, that and the fact that nobody in his party actually liked him. I liked the clips of Mitt I saw from that first debate. In fact, it's why I tuned in for the third debate, but that Mitt was nowhere to be seen. The guy should have went all in during debates two and three, but he didn't, and here we are.

Nor yours, it seems. The question was asked in response to Nitne:





In that context, looks like he's asking for Nitne's take on it. In any event:



Whatever floats your boat, Clint, but maybe that hippie lettuce is doing more damage than you think, yes? If you're going to do that, a page after the question was posted, how about putting it in some [Obama} tags, so it's clear that you're mimicking the senile, instead of trying to have it both ways.





Indeed.

I think he shot his load during the first debate and had to sit around the set as impotently as Flopsy Kn0% for the other two.

But, you're right. The Multiple-Mitt mess definitely cost him. Hell, it's why the Salt Lake Tribune refused to endorse him and they're the largest Mormon paper in the world.

They didn't endorse him because he moved too left/centrist for their position.

They're all lying of course, the candidates, but they have to all appear centrist to garner swing voters, and the election results show it. I would have much preferred a centrist appearing Romney get elected then "do what he do" than have Obama do the same, especially as a lame duck. I really think the shit is going to hit the fan.

Double dumb. The affair is one thing but the e-mails and the intervention in a custody case show a serious lack of judgment and priorities.

Nothing make an old man dumber than younger pussy.

We should focus on Benghazi, not this shit.

That Kelley skank lists her occupation as "unpaid social liason". Free, skanky, probably stupid. I think she's our girl.

I wonder when the Bravo Network will be adding her to the cast of The Real Housewives of Miami or will they build a show around her. She seems to have the right combination of snobby and stupid that will light up the catty taste buds of the queer demographic that is Bravo.

That's gotta give the IRS man a chuckle every April when she sends in her 1040.

Obama is whining about the republicans taking Susan Rice to task over her Benghazi statement. He said she had nothing to do with it. If that's so WHAT THE FUCK WAS SHE DOING GIVING THE STATEMENT ABOUT THE ATTACK? Impeach this dumb criminal lying son of a bitch !

How about Chanel Preston for playing Broadwell in the bound to be upcoming parody ?

I'd just like to say, that I have been paying as little attention as possible to the Libyan Embassy stuff and the Generals' whores stuff. 5 years from now, looking back, I think they will be blips on the radar.

I can't believe ppl get so worked up over the General keeping a whore. Fucking stupid.

Keep the focus on the Benghazi cover up.

bdm...you're on a roll. instead of logging in and wondering why i check the place in the face of figgs 20 post spew everyday i've been enjoying and looking forward to what you have to contribute. i'm not sure how long this or even you will last but keep it up you fucken savage.

If you insist, but, as with the budget, the numbers don't seem to be in your favor. Let's look at how comparable events unfolded under different administrations:









Cover up? How does testifying before a hostile Congress equal a cover up?


Petraeus to testify Friday before House committee on Libya assault

Clinton to testify before Congress about Benghazi attack


I get the feeling you'll next suggest that Petraeus, being a clever bastard, timed his romp with an unstable broad so that his life would implode at the very moment he was scheduled to testify about an attack that hadn't yet happened. No matter. As soon as this lie is disproven, you'll come back with three more. It's what you do. Just remember three things:


(I) Just because you cry "coverup" a thousand times doesn't mean there is one;

(II) Just because you claim to be an, ahem "licensed structural engineer," doesn't mean you can identify rebar; and

(III) Just because you claim to be tall, doesn't mean you're not a dwarf, eh, shorty?

WTC bombing and Okie bombing were Clinton or GHWB?

Legit question. I remember stuff that happened in the 90's, but have a difficult time timelining all of it. I think that stuff was pre OJ, but don't remember if it was all after Jan 93.

First WTC was Clinton. So was Oklahoma. I didn't include Oklahoma because it was a domestic incident, and we're comparing foreign, Muzzie terrorist incidents.

For the R's, it's: W, Reagan, W, Reagan, W.

For the D's, it's: Obama, Bubba, Bubba, Bubba, Bubba.

Come to think of it: Obama's got the least casualties of all of 'em. Some cover up.

wasted effort JB. I'm flattered though, really.

Terrorist is a terrorist in my opinion. Ruby Ridge or Waco wouldn't be entered, because those were our government doing the terrorizing via botched home invasions.

OKC was a Muslim financed operation. Read a book about it years ago. Was far from convinced. But for the purposes of this discussion, I'm very convinced.

Come to think of it, Watergate had no casualties. Yet the scene of Nixon getting on Marine One is pretty iconic.

Before we all wet ourselves, I'm in no way saying this will cost the President it's chair.

That is why I said it is nothing more than a blip. Those at the embassy worked for the government, that makes em assets not people. Assets are disposable and replaceable. Dehumanizing them makes the loss easier to take.

That wouldn't surprise me in the least. I mean, we all know how easily these loony right-wingers are taken in by the jihadi jabber. Oh, look. . .

I can't share my Afghan story, but that pic pretty much sums it up. All of them dudes prolly wound up on a deck of cards. Some alliances only last as long as the common enemy and cash flow do.

Ice-T once more. He can't really interest himself in founding fathers blathering on about freedom while believing it's okay to own n!ggers, as he put it, and thinks they were insane.

It does, doesn't it. After all, wasn't Tim McVeigh ranting on and on about the Founding Fathers and the Minutemen and such?

Anyway, I checked the numbers and even if you add OKC to Bubba's tally, the Death Toll is still 3,374 (R) to 438 (D). These guys really aren't in a position to point fingers on this subject.

And that one dude third from the right I'm absolutely certain met up with some high explosives.

"We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow."

-- Lord Palmerston

What does it sum up, exactly? We fought two wars with England. 2 with Germany. A pretty big one with Japan.

We threw our cards in with the Afghanis in the 80s because it was in our national interests (oil), and was the right thing to do. But, like we do, we failed to win the peace. No Party was immune from that, before we start getting partisan.

The thing about Monday morning quarterbacking the Afghani thing is that in the 80s, absolutely no one was saying "oh, we best watch out. In 20 years these fuckheads are going to be shooting Stingers at us". The only people who were against supporting the mujas, and the Contras, were the usual suspects who were:

A) Afraid that standing up to the Soviets would just make them mad.

or

2) Fellow travellers.

So don't pretend that the Tali problem was visible a mile away.

As for McVeigh, he was out far enough the Nazis didn't want him. It's a myth that WP/ militia/ Nazis are sitting around waiting for marching orders from Limbaugh and Gutfeld. I got to know quite a few of them in my FFL days. Limbaugh and Savage/ Beck/ whoever are all part of the System. Certainly not to be trusted. There is zero evidence that Reagan comparing the muja to the Founding Fathers contributed to OKC.

I'm sure T would be just as rich and chunky white whore fucking if his ancestors hadn't been pulled out of the trees and brought to civilization. He'd either be ordering a Rambo gun from the Lord of War or digging diamonds with his one remaining arm.

You're quoting a guy who went from being a Tory in the house to being a liberal interventionist who supported revolution throughout Europe when he became Foreign Secretary?





Ummm, Barry? There's NO oil in Afghanistan. There were just some Russians who would have made no real difference in the Cold War if we'd left the thing alone and continued to bankrupt them building nukes. As we were.




You're right, because no great power ever suffered disaster by relying upon barbarians to fight their battles for them.




. . .is that it makes Monday morning quarterbacking Benghazi seem even sillier than it already is. BTW: How many decades have to pass before it's no longer "Monday Morning Quarterbacking?" When does it become "the historical record?"




I'd go with the latter. I can't see Tritone picking up a gun and defending himself when he's done nothing but roll over and beg for more abuse for the past five years.

Why the pic sums up my Afghani story: We were once friendly with the people we later fought. If you were known or found to have contacts with our allies turned enemies, a grilling from Homeland Security ensued. Even if you were an 80 year old man with dementia and a life long hatred of Russians.

I meant Ice-T.

Enemies become friends, friends become enemies. Geopolitics works that way. Always has.

You can have my Monday Morning Quarterbacking when you pry it from my cold, dead hand.

Barbarians or no, the problem at the time with helping the muja wasn't that it would blow up in our face in 20 years. No one even considered that, beyond your Monday Morning Quarterbacking that "no great power ever suffered disaster by relying upon barbarians to fight their battles for them". In the grand scheme, most major powers did fine letting barbarians do the fighting. In the Empire days it was pretty much standard operating procedure. A lot of the problem is pretending that barbarians are human and don't need a firm ruling hand to keep them in line.

Before you go lecturing about geopolitics, or history, you might want to learn a bit about both. Like, this business about there being oil in Afghanistan.




Exactly. Which is why the Reagan boys, having failed to learn from history, ended up repeating it.







So, once again, it's fine when you do it, but when you're on the receiving end, you whine like a bitch. I hope you cling to this all the way through the mid-terms.

Barry, you're clearly a useless pot-smoking ex-hippie-turned-'libertarian' who probably lives off of government disability (that you are faking since you're too fucking lazy to work for a living). Just like Coke.

All this 'firm ruling hand' shit isn't too convincing coming from the likes of you.

I work with an engineer from Iran. Even he agrees the only way to control Arabs is with a brutal iron fist. It's the only thing they respect.

1) You're not an Engineer.

2) Iranians aren't Arabs.

I'm not an engineer? lol.

Sure you are, little buddy:

Iranians = Persian. Shi'ite Muslims. They hate the Sunnis more than they hate us. Jews top their list like they top everyone elses.

Exactly, and the ethnic "Arabs" are, with the exception of some Iraqis, Sunnis.

I have zero problems hating on the muzzis. But we ought to be clear as to why. Because, as Shorty has demonstrated, they can be used as a scapegoat in order to buttress claims that never happened. Like his claim to be an engineer.










:pause while Shorty the "engineer" googles the term "buttress" :

They're all towel-head, sand niggers to me. I'm sure Bornyo would have fun shooting them and making an ear necklace.

Ear necklaces: Not just for American soldiers in Vietnam anymore.

I can't blame Petraeus for fucking that hot slut Paula Broadwell. I mean, look at how hideous his wife is!

Like you say, there is acceptable risk, and the people who were in charge decided it was impossible to cut off the attack. I have heard reports that two americans serving in the area did try to attack the attackers. And they ended up dead too. There was just no proper way to counter the attack, and the attackers were obviously prepared for some kind of attack.

Rice wasn't under oath. At least I don't think so. She was trotted out to the sunday shows to put out a statement. And her talking point were vetted by the CIA. She's done nothing wrong.

From what I heard, two former Navy SEALs ignored repeated orders to stay away from the area, but responded anyway to try to save their comrades. They were painting the enemy's mortar location with lasers and calling in an airstrike and waiting for the planes to bomb the target. But the planes were never sent.

The people in charge decided the election was more important than American lives. They also knew they had the MSM in the bag for them who would convince morons like you the administration did nothing wrong, and try and bury the story.

It's why we know more about the Romney's 47% comment than we do about Libya.

What 47% comment?