I missed that, thanks. Weird that we would go to war 57 years later and I would then post him 3 weeks later. RIP.
... McDonald recounted a story he attributed to Phil Butler, a former Hanoi Hilton prisoner of war and co-founder of Veterans for Peace, stating that the Viet Cong occasionally played American music to demoralize captives, but that hearing I-Feel-Like-I'm-Fixin-to-Die-Rag instead boosted their morale. He also related an account from a Vietnam veteran who said that a friend died in his arms during the war, and that the friend's final words were, "Whoopee, we're all gonna die."
If you want to achieve greatness stop asking for permission.
1312. ETTD. 86 47.
It is not my responsibility to eplain your lack of understanding. This issue in Iran is apples and oranges from 9/11.
I agree the middle east allies are late to the party, but it seems they may be coming around as Iran continues to hurl missiles and drones at them. Your statement about Iranian troops is understood. Hence my reluctance for US ground troops.
Too difficult to explain the unexplainable? I'll give you a hint, you're clueless. Israel led DonOld around by the nose and his massive ignorance and ego is burying him and us. The middle east nations just want to do business. Believe it or not, that's the overriding history of the region.
Sure Wilbur, they'll be there right on the heels of NATO sending ships to escort tankers through the Straits.
Eamus Catuli~AC 000000000101010202020303010304 020405....Ahhhh, forget it, it's gonna be a while.
Your ignorance and slavish obedience to your masters is noted. Please ignore the fact that NATO joined us after 9/11.
What about our "allies" in the middle east? This should be their fight as much or more than our fight.
BTW, Iran has about 250,000 effective ground troops and another 250,000 in reserve. How do you think our forces will fare as they won't be able to effectively resupply?
What happens after that?
You still haven't explained your bass ackwards claim. We've already proven if you chop the head off another pops up.
"NATO joined us after 9/11" in Afghanistan. 21 years later the US was mostly on its own when TRE45QN and Joe handed it back to the Taliban.
Support for our invasion and occupation of Iraq based on hundreds of lies was much more tepid, and it predictably became a mess that we're still suffering the effects from. SoupySales and other diehard cons can't handle the fact that France was right all along.
"Iran continues to hurl missiles and drones at" our Gulf allies who host US bases that are uses to attack Iran. Is that not self-defense?
If you want to achieve greatness stop asking for permission.
1312. ETTD. 86 47.
Your ignorance and slavish obedience to your masters is noted. Please ignore the fact that NATO joined us after 9/11.
What about our "allies" in the middle east? This should be their fight as much or more than our fight.
BTW, Iran has about 250,000 effective ground troops and another 250,000 in reserve. How do you think our forces will fare as they won't be able to effectively resupply?
What happens after that?
You still haven't explained your bass ackwards claim. We've already proven if you chop the head off another pops up.
"NATO joined us after 9/11" in Afghanistan. 21 years later the US was mostly on its own when TRE45QN and Joe handed it back to the Taliban.
Support for our invasion and occupation of Iraq based on hundreds of lies was much more tepid, and it predictably became a mess that we're still suffering the effects from. SoupySales and other diehard cons can't handle the fact that France was right all along.
"Iran continues to hurl missiles and drones at" our Gulf allies who host US bases that are uses to attack Iran. Is that not self-defense?
Yeah, forgot about the "Coalition of the Willing."
Several NATO members did participate independently in the U.S.-led coalition (often called the “Coalition of the Willing”):
United Kingdom (largest partner, major combat role)
Poland
Spain
Italy
Denmark
Netherlands (mainly post-invasion support)
Others contributed smaller forces or logistical help
Eamus Catuli~AC 000000000101010202020303010304 020405....Ahhhh, forget it, it's gonna be a while.
Yeah, forgot about the "Coalition of the Willing."
Several NATO members did participate independently in the U.S.-led coalition (often called the “Coalition of the Willing”):
United Kingdom (largest partner, major combat role)
Poland
Spain
Italy
Denmark
Netherlands (mainly post-invasion support)
Others contributed smaller forces or logistical help
Counting non-NATO nations I called it the Coalition of the Bribed and Extorted. Thanks, Shrublicans.
I got arrested temporarily blocking a Spanish warship from leaving for Iraq a few days before Cheney launched the invasion, and their participation was a major factor in the fall of the Spanish government soon afterwards.
If you want to achieve greatness stop asking for permission.
1312. ETTD. 86 47.
An AWACS, "several refueling planes" and "more than 10" injured GIs is a VERY effective attack. Think how bad it might have been if the war wasn't "over on day one".
If you want to achieve greatness stop asking for permission.
1312. ETTD. 86 47.
Sounds like the USA is tucking tail and admitting a loss? Does this not leave the US in a worse position than the status quo given now Iran will have complete control over the straits? We already "won" and accomplished our objectives a while back according to the White House, so the nuclear sites must not have been the main objective of this latest war. Here's what the White House said: https://www.whitehouse.gov/releases/202 ... fake-news/
Shortly after the invasion began, the three countries came under heavy political pressure from both the United States and the Soviet Union, as well as from the United Nations, eventually prompting their withdrawal from Egypt.
The crisis demonstrated that the United Kingdom and France could no longer pursue their independent foreign policy without consent from the United States.
...
The crisis strengthened Nasser's standing and led to international humiliation for the British—with historians arguing that it signified the end of its role as a superpower—as well as the French amid the Cold War.[16][17][18][19][20][21][22] As a result of the conflict, the UN established an emergency force to police and patrol the Egypt–Israel border. For his diplomatic efforts in resolving the conflict through UN initiatives, Canadian external affairs minister Lester B. Pearson received a Nobel Peace Prize.
Analysts have argued that the crisis may have emboldened the USSR, prompting the Soviet invasion of Hungary.[23][24]
Militarily, France and Britain were successful. Politically, they failed for multiple reasons. They secretly planned with Israel to follow them to war if Israel made the first strike (Protocol of Sèvres). They appeared as the aggressors seen as trying to reassert colonial rule over Egypt. They succumbed to pressure from pre-eminent super powers (the US, USSR) indicating they were no longer global leaders.
The important lesson to be learned in all of this is it oftentimes doesn't take much to tip an empire into steep decline. The Soviet Union's collapse is another such example. Once the veil of supremacy is yanked off and a an empire's leadership comes under intense scrutiny, the fall is often quite quick.
. Think of the thousands of planes built for WW2.
When did Ann Coulter become a Faux Noise-hating, DonOld-mocking leftwing liberal?
An AWACS, "several refueling planes" and "more than 10" injured GIs is a VERY effective attack. Think how bad it might have been if the war wasn't "over on day one". 
