WAR?
Trump, The-Twitwit-in-Chief, tweeted:
Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) Saudi Arabia oil supply was attacked. There is reason to believe that we know the culprit, are locked and loaded depending on verification, but are waiting to hear from the Kingdom as to who they believe was the cause of this attack, and under what terms we would proceed !
Apparently Trump is awaiting orders from "the Kingdom" (of Saudi Arabia).
“ Locked and loaded ” means “locking the magazine into the gun and loading the ammunition into the gun's chamber.” The weapon is now ready to fire on command.
Originated in American English, supposedly as an instructional command to prepare an M1 Garand, the main rifle used during World War II, for battle. the expression was popularized 1949 by John Wayne in the movie Sands of Iwo Jima. Various similar phrases predate it, including in transposed form as “ load and lock ”. https://www.google.com/search?q=locked+and+loaded&hl=en&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjO8_eQ-NbkAhUxwlkKHR5yCekQ_AUIDCgA&biw=1440&bih=837&dpr=2
So, using that definition, I assume Trump is ready to fire upon Iran when Saudi Arabia gives the order.
Butt, The Donald has no military experience so I don't know what he means when he says "locked and loaded". The White House spin machine is already walking his saber rattling back
Marc Short explains Trump’s ‘locked and loaded’ comments
Chief of Staff to Vice President Pence Marc Short argues America is far better prepared under Trump to handle Saudi oil production strikes.
President Trump’s tweet that the U.S. is “locked and loaded” in response to the twin drone strikes on Saudi oil facilities means “several things,” according to Marc Short, chief of staff to Vice President Pence.
After being asked by FBN’s Maria Bartiromo if the president’s tweet implied that “the U.S. is ready to respond to Iran,” and whether we are “looking at a military response on the horizon,” Short said he wouldn’t comment specifically, before saying that “locked and loaded means several things.”
“One thing it means is that America today under this president is far better prepared to handle these sorts of events because we're now a net exporter of oil,” Short said. “This is not like the 1970s, the oil embargo or the 1990 ... when Iraq invaded Kuwait ... The United States is a net exporter producing 16 million barrels of oil a day and much of that has been because of the deregulatory agenda of this administration that has enabled so much of that."
The U.S. is stronger than ever thanks to fracking, he added.
“You look at today all the Democratic candidates on the stage are basically advocating abolishing of fracking -- fracking is what's enabled America to become far more insulated from these sorts of events enabling us to be a bit better prepared,” said Short.
When Bartiromo asked whether the president is abandoning his pressure against Iran amid John Bolton’s departure , Short replied: “There's no talk of abandoning the campaign.”
“In fact the reality is that ... we've united international communities to put these sanctions on Iran and it is causing Iran to suffer. We want the Iranian people to experience freedom… And we know that they're basically putting this pressure on Iran is helping that cause. But the reality is that they are… struggling enormously because their oil exports have diminished dramatically down to a small fraction of what it was. And so they want to have oil price shocks,” he said.
https://www. fox business.com/politics/marc-short-explains-trump-locked-loaded-tweets
It looks like Marc Short doesn't know what Trump means by "locked and loaded" so he trying to blow smoke up Maria Bartiromo's ass.
What is NOT being addressed is the other even more ominous part of Trumpt's tweet:
but are waiting to hear from the Kingdom as to who they believe was the cause of this attack, and under what terms we would proceed !
According to the U.S. Constitution Congress has the power to declare war , NOT the President and certainly NOT Saudia Arabia. Iran did NOT attack the United States.
Any attack on Iran would be fucking UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
Tags
Who is online
82 visitors
We don't want a fucking war!
President Bone Spur has to ask Congress to declare war before he can attack Iran.
What happened to: "ONE! TWO! THREE! FOUR!" ?
He would only threaten a dead man. He's too cowardly to threaten a real, live man
Trump may finally get to push his shinny button.
"The missiles are flying. Hallelujah! Hallelujah! (Greg Stillson...The Dead Zone)
His button is bigger than Kim Jong-un's button.
I don't want to laugh but if I don't I might sit here and get all nervous. trmp does emulate Stillson doesn't he? Do you think Stephen King has a crystal ball?
There is one scene where StilIson threatens the local press which is something Trump has done in regards to the media. I read somewhere that more than one coincidence has happened with King's writings. I will have to do some research.
This is an older article but.....
Here's a newer one
Was that in the book, movie, or both? I have to watch "The Dead Zone" again
Spot on. Thank you for the links.
The movie. It was when Stillson and his goon confronted the newspaper owner with compromising photos and threatened to send them to his wife unless he didn't run the hit piece on Stillson. It was like something butt hurt Donnie would do.
I remember now, thanks!
that's not the one where the pol holds up the kid when about to be shot , is it ?
Yes.
At the rally, Stillson begins his speech. Johnny attempts to shoot Stillson but misses and is wounded by Stillson's bodyguards. Before he can fire again, Stillson grabs a young child and holds him up as a human shield . Johnny pauses, unable to shoot, and is shot twice by the bodyguards. He falls off the balcony and fatally injures himself.
A bystander photographs Stillson in the act of using the child as a shield, and when published, the picture destroys Stillson's political future
Thank you, i vaugly remember that movie
The Donald like to use children as props.
And now the administration is saying that ''locked and loaded'' doesn't mean what it means.
Welcome to chapter 666 of Bizarro World.
They backpeddled fast.
Maybe the administration is loaded and realize they may be locked up.
Omigawd, that's hilarious!
Houthi rebels in Yemen have claimed responsibility. So Trump might not get his excuse to attack Iran, anyway.
I really hope you're right, but he wants to attack Iran sooooo bad.
No he doesn't. He just wants to appear that he does. He's all smoke and mirrors. That chickenshit five-time deferment king.
From Military Times .
I'm sure you were equally disdainful of "I loathe the military" Bill Clinton when he was bombing a medicine factory in the Sudan or bombing a European country, Yugoslavia so he could defend Muslim Albanians. No military war authorizations then.
And of course you were equally speaking out against Obama when he bombed Libya and took out Giddafi?
And just to make my view clear, I fully support EVERY president's inherent authority to engage in military action when they believe it is in support of our national security interests. And Congress delegated by law added affirmation of that authority with the War Powers Act.
More lies
What lies? Everything said was 100% accurate.
1. The first bombing happened under Reagan-- not Obama!
After several unproductive days of meeting with European and Arab nations, and influenced by an American serviceman's death, Ronald Reagan, on 14 April, ordered an air raid on Libya.
2. The bombing did not kill Ghaddafi! Ghaddafi escaped unharmed -- he had been warned in advance. )
3.Ghaddafi was killed much later-- by Libyan opposition forces, not by American forces
Gaddafi was wounded by grenade fragmentation from a grenade thrown by one of his own men which bounced off a wall and fell in front of Gaddafi, shredding his flak jacket . He sat on the floor dazed and in shock, bleeding from a wound in the left temple. Then one of his group waved a white turban in surrender. [14]
Gaddafi was killed shortly afterwards. There are conflicting reports; according to one report, Gaddafi said "Please don't shoot!" prior to being shot, [18] and when questioned by Misratan rebel fighters about the damage done to Misrata by his forces, denied any involvement, and begged his captors not to hit or kill him. One fighter demanded Gaddafi stand up, but he struggled to do so. [19] Gaddafi can be heard in one video saying "God forbids this" and "Do you know right from wrong?" when being shouted at by his captors. [20] [21] In a video of his arrest he can be seen draped on the hood of a car, held by rebel fighters. [22] [23] A senior NTC official said that no order was given to execute Gaddafi. [23] According to another NTC source, "they captured him alive and while he was being taken away, they beat him and then they killed him". [23] Mahmoud Jibril gave an alternative account, stating that "when the car was moving it was caught in crossfire between the revolutionaries and Gaddafi forces in which he was hit by a bullet in the head." [24]
Several videos related to the death were broadcast by news channels and circulated via the Internet. The first shows footage of Gaddafi alive, his face and shirt bloodied, stumbling and being dragged toward an ambulance by armed militants chanting " God is great " in Arabic . [6] [7] The video shows Gaddafi being sodomized with a bayonet. [25] [26] [27] Another shows Gaddafi, stripped to the waist, suffering from an apparent gunshot wound to the head, and in a pool of blood, together with jubilant fighters firing automatic weapons in the air. [6] [7] A third video, posted on YouTube, shows fighters "hovering around his lifeless-looking body, posing for photographs and yanking his limp head up and down by the hair." [6] [7] [28] Another video shows him being stripped naked and verbally abused by his captors. [29
It was rather convenient that you forgot to mention that it was in 1986 that Reagan bombed Libya and only for one day.
Obama bombed Libya from 19 March to 31 October of 2011.
Those facts just slipped your mind huh?
Nope.
But that's not relevant to his comment.
Which was:
And of course you were equally speaking out against Obama when he bombed Libya and took out Giddafi?
Obama's bombing didn't take out Ghaddafi. (Libyan rebels did).
Then why mention Reagan? He did not take out Ghaddafi either
VERY good!!!!
Good likeness, too!
Not alone:
So? He still never asked for or received Congressional approval.
The Houthis are supported by Iran.
They are another of Iran's proxies, like Hezbollah and Hamas.
Yep.
That's true. He'll have his excuse, after all.
Dammit.
Yep!
Yes.
Incidentally, it still hasn't been definitely established that Iran fired the weapons.In fact I was surprised at initial reports-- my guess was that Iran itself wouldn't go that far in provoking the U.S.
While the weapons were Iranian, the reason initial reports said the were from Iran is that they came in from the North or North-East-- meaning Iran or Iraq.
The Houthis are in Yemen-- so if they fired them the weapons would've come in from the South.
It is possible they were fired by iranians. But there are also Hizb'Allah forces in Iraq-- so my guess is that they were fired by H. (Either on their own accord-- or iran put them up to it). And if they were fired by H, Iran can claim they had nothing to do with it. Its been known they've been arming H for years-- the Iranians can claim they have no control over what H does with the weapons once they give them to H.
BTW the Houthis in Yemen have been firing heavy weapons-- IIRC rockets-- in S Arabia for some time. I believe thought that each incident is usually a single rocket-- and their aim usually isn't to good.
(A friend of mine works for the US gov't and has been traveling to S Arabia regularly.. "on business". He doesn't want to say what he does. But maybe next time I see him I'll try to tactfully ask a few questions...
They have they most advanced drone technology in the Middle East.
Do the drones have nine lives?
Man with Megaphone: What do we want??!?
Crowd: CATDRONES!!
Man: When do we want it??!?
Crowd: MEOW!!!!
looks like a bunch of pussies to me.
Trumpp could probably handle them with one hand, hows that grab em ?
LOVE IT!
The cat missile.
Warning, hovercraft inbound.
Nice.
I think that kitty smoked too much catnip.
But we have the loyal dog pilots of Dog Fort!
I loved this ... ! Ha!
The threat is real.
This dude's serious as hell.
OMG, that is hilarious.
Wow, that is some photo.
Looks like a pre lend-lease soviet Polikarpov.
You would have to be drunk to fly one of those in that kind of weather.
Trump would be better off doing the "Obama/Libya" thingy !
Just "Go for it" !
It was "such a Beautiful thing" back then.....according to the media !
What's good and PRAISED for the Goose …..MUST be GOOD and PRAISED for the Gander ……….. and all that !
One "Good" turn deserves "ANOTHER" !
"Oh Ya",...… "Bet me" …….. "No way" ?
what
do you need a gaggle...
Clowders are cuddly and MORE fun to play with !
Cranberry sauce is good for the goose and the gander.
Do geese use gaggle to look up stuff?
Oh for Cranberries sake !
Damn...
No..he's just being a Silly Goose.
So why in the world did we sell all the military weapons if we have to get involved. I thought the point of that was to let them take care of things themselves.
If the Saudis want to do something, sit back and watch. Not our problem.
Drill baby drill, remember? We don't need them.
Damn straight!
I've got CNN and plenty of popcorn and weed.
So you're CNN's viewer!
Haha. That was actually funny.
So why in the world did we sell all the military weapons if we have to get involved.
We sell them lots of advanced (& extremely expensive!) weaponry because it brings a lot of money into the U.S. economy!
The total Saudi military is probably one of the best armed in the world-- tons of highly sophisticated weapons.
But the calibre of their fighting personnel supposedly is not that great-- even for an Arab army.
Also, the Saudis prefer to have other countries fight for their causes.....
I thought the point of that was to let them take care of things themselves.
If the Saudis want to do something, sit back and watch.
One of the problems with this whole brouhaha is that it goes beyond being an attack on just Saudi infrastructure. A good portion of the world's oil comes from that area-- if it is stopped the entire world might well slip into recession.
A lack of Saudi oil would have some impact-- oil prices worldwide would rise. However the real fea ris that if Iran and its proxies escalate this, they might shur down the Straits of Hormuz:
The Strait of Hormuz is the world's single most important oil passageway, forming a chokepoint between the Arabian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. The 39km strait is the only route to the open ocean for over one-sixth of global oil production and one-third of the world's liquified natural gas (LNG).Jul 11, 2019
The world is somewhat less dependent on Middle eastern oil then it used to be (thanks to advances in technology-- i.e. "Hydraulic Fracturing"), but still. if the price of oil skyrockets it could really hurt world economies ....
(which, with the exception of the U.S., are already fairly weak for the most part).
Excellent point.
At a time when Jordan had top line Mig21s they more than met their match by folks like Ran Ronen and Giora Epstien in dated Mirages and Neshers (a Mirage clone...that is another story right there, and the one most assumed is wrong).
Training and dedication.
training and dedication.
And once there were Soviet pilots in Egypt-- supposedly to train Egyptian pilots who would go up against Israeli pilots. But once the Soviet pilots themselves went up against the israelis-- several Russian pilots were shot down-- no Israeli plane was lost!
Israel’s Downing of Soviet Planes Indicates Soviet Pilots No Match for Israelis
Both Epstein and Ronen spent their fair share of time in the Negev.
Epstein retired as the greatest Jet Ace. His record remains.
Just recalled, there was a time Epstein was outnumbered something like 10 to 1, maybe not that much but it was pretty ridiculous.. Some other IAF jets came in to the area, Epstein aka hawkeye, sees them and calls out "hey these are mine. Go find your own".
I think those were Mig21s.
That being said-- the other pilots in the IAF are pretty exceptional as well...
After a long flight from Israel, Israeli jets destroyed the nuclear reactor Saddam Hussein was building:
Operation Opera was a surprise Israeli air strike carried out on 7 June 1981, which destroyed an Iraqi nuclear reactor under construction 17 kilometers (10.5 miles) southeast of Baghdad.
Operation Opera, and related Israeli government statements following it, established the Begin Doctrine, which explicitly stated the strike was not an anomaly, but instead “a precedent for every future government in Israel.” Israel's counter-proliferation preventive strike added another dimension to their existing policy of deliberate ambiguity, as it related to the nuclear capability of other states in the region.
On 7 June 1981, a flight of Israeli Air Force F-16A fighter aircraft, with an escort of F-15As, bombed and heavily damaged the Osirak reactor.[10] Israel called the operation an act of self-defense said that the reactor had "less than a month to go" before "it might have become critical.
(All Israeli planes returned safely to base without a single Israeli casualty):
Ten years after that successful mission, the Israeli's showed great restraint when Iraq attacked them with their infamous Scud missiles.
You make it sound as no matter what happened, we would have no choice but to get involved.
In order to save the world economy...
I remember that well. There's a lot in that article-- but the key reason Israel didn't join the coalition vs Saddam was that if they did it would have caused a significant decrease in support amongst Arab states for the coalition against Saddam as the other Arab countries hated the Jews so much. (Or at least pretended to in some cases-- it was not "politically correct" in theArab world to even give the appearance of not hating the israelis-- and pretending they were the spawn of the devil-- the biggest threat in the entire world!).
So they were smart enough not to be openly involved in fighting Saddam-- and that was true for both wars.
Bombing the reactors-- both of them in fact-- was a different matter. They knew a pre-emptive strike was necessary-- if either country developped nukes their existence was at stake. But enterin the coalition vs Saddam wasn't a top priority.
What is not widely known however, is that they did participate in the war effort. In several ways.
One of the things the Israelis did was to sneak into northern Iraq and do a lot of training of our Kurdish friends. Since elite Israeli military units are some of the best in the world, the training they gave to Kurdish forces was fantastic!
How were they able to sneak into Iraq? Well here's something else that's not widely known by most Americans. The Kurds are indigneous to that area. Most Kurds are Muslims (Sunni), although unlike the Arabs they tend not to produce the fanatical type of Islamic extremists that are present in the Arab world. But-- over the years some of those Kurds converted to Christianity, some to Judaisim.
Jewish Kurds faced "double persecution" in the Arab world-- because they were Kurds, and also because they were Jews.So when Israel was re-created many were able to flee to safety in Israel. Israeli then had a pool of native Kurdish speakers-- who also `were native Arabic speakers--- and who spoke both with perfect Iraqi accents! And who had been born and raised in Iraqi Kurdish homes-- so they fitin when smuggled into Iraq!
What is not widely known however, is that they did participate in the war effort. In several ways.
One of the things the Israelis did was to sneak into northern Iraq and do a lot of training of our Kurdish friends. Since elite Israeli military units are some of the best in the world, the training they gave to Kurdish forces was fantastic!
Another crucial role the Israelis played in the war against Saddam-- they snuck into Iraqi deserts in modified beach buggies, and acted as spotters on the ground-- guiding in air strikes ogf coalition forces.
(Incidentally, both of these things were secret at the time....the full story may still not be widely known publicly)
Currently, there are 200,000 Kurds that live in Israel.
That's not my take on the situation. I was just trying to explain why that for some time western powers felt that it was crucial to maintain a strong military presence near the Straits of Hormuz because so much of the world's oil flows through it. ( Map -- note all the major oil producing countries lining The Persian Gulf-- and most of that oil has to pass out through the narrow Straits of Hormuz).
And they had feared that if any hostile power blocked it there would be a YUGE oil shortage. Which would tank the world economies.... ( no pun intended).
Most of the time the large military presence in there area (Al Udeid Air Base) would be enough to deter any hostile entity from trying anything.....
BTW, an attack on any oil facilities, such as the recent attack on those Saudi Refineries, would have precipitated a big Stock market crash. But this time I was surprised at the reaction-- there was only a relatively mild and short lived dip in the market.
Why? Because currently the entire world is a lot less dependent on Arab oil than it used to be. (due in large part to advances in technology....i.e. "hydraulic fracturing")
In addition, it appears that traders do not believe this attack will result in a major war...of any significant duration...i.e. it will not seriously disrupt the world's supply of oil for any extended period.
Finally, with the exception of mainly the U.S., most of the rest of the world is in a recession or close to one so oil demand is somewhat low-- and its getting worse.
Absolutely.
Just as there were more tank commanders than Avigdor Khalini.
Kahalani...
Here's the 69 th comment on this thread.
Why in Hell should the US defend the lousy Saudis who attacked us on 9-11 and who have been sucking us dry for oil for the last fifty years? Because Iran? Bullshit! Let the goddamn Sunnis and the godforsaken Shiites fight it out among themselves for once. If Israel wants in the fight so bad they can fight without us, too. There is no good reason on earth that the US should sacrifice any more of our young people and our hard earned treasure on Islam's alter to Allah...
True. Now that we are largely energy independent, no thanks to any Democrats, we now have that choice as a luxury.
I don't know of any Democrats who "are itching for a fight".
Can you provide an example?
No doubt he'll reply with "Antifa!" as if the masked anarchists and opportunists represent democrats. He'll ignore the actual dozens of murderers perpetrated by right wing extremists every year as those "itching for a fight" and say its those who showed up to counter those marching with swastikas and confederate flags in Charlottesville that are the real threat to America, not the ones chanting "Jews will not replace us!".
My guess is he'll say all Dems who are anti US energy independence. And that is most of them to be sure.
I wonder how many people here remember waiting in line for gas. I mean really remember it.
Not many i bet. It was not a very pleasant time for most Americans.
I checked to see if I could find any Democrats who want to bomb Iran. I cold only find Republican who are willing to fuck with Iran.
Okay. I showed you mine now let's see what you've got to back up your bogus statement.
Please look at some fucking FACTS.
U.S. Oil production decreased during the Ford years.
U.S. Oil production was relatively flat during Carter and Reagan Administrations.
Production decreased (at about the same rate) while both Bushes and Clinton were in office.
Butt, production dramatically increased while Obama was in office.
Energy independence isn't only Crude oil even though production of that has increased significantly since Trump took office
But maybe you weren't sentient when Obama imposed all those Oil and Natural gas drilling restrictions that Trump helped to lift.
Fuckin A eh?
Let's look at U.S. energy production.
As you can see it was relatively flat when GW was in office, butt it increased during Obama's years in office. Although there was a decline when some oil platforms and fracking ops were taken offline when oil prices decline in 2016.
Total energy production:
This shows oil & gas prices:
Total nonsense. I and virtually every Democrat I know here in California are all for American energy independence. Where we may differ from most Republicans is how we get there. It's not going to be through fracking up all our water supplies and destroying the environment by cutting regulations to allow coal and oil to do what they will to generate the most profits, consequences be damned. It will be through disciplined investment in renewal energy, solar and wind farms, tidal surge generators and even new much smaller more efficient nuclear power plants with much less nuclear waste. But simply digging deeper and burning more irreplaceable finite fossil fuels is pure ignorance.
And yes, I remember the gas lines and it was a pain which is why I support fuel efficient vehicles, hybrids and electric vehicles that can plug in instead of having to wait for their sip of the old black gold.
As you suggest, energy production is frequently more a function of market and technology than it is presidential policy.
A comment of pure desperation
A comment of pure bull shit
Which is nothing more than a total lie
So ruining our country's land is ok with you. Do you really love trump that much that he can destroy the water, and forests and the land for corporations
I happen to be fortunate enough to be able to walk my daughters to school (about 3 mile round trip) then walk to work. No unicorn necessary.
I remember that, I was a kid. I remember one time I was with a neighbor, waited in line and she only had so much $ to put in. They pumped over that and when she didn't have the extra $, they made her pull over and siphoned out the gas.
That's true.
In 2016 the oil prices bottomed and certain oil operations (fracking and off shore) became unprofitable which cause a decline in total U.S. energy production. Butt, total energy production and oil production went up during the Obama years.
They can use fake shortages to raise prices.
Not always as simple as that.
The stock market can only operate if there are differences of opinion.if everyone thought the same way, there'd be no market! A trade take at least two people-- one to sell, one to buy.
If several people want to sell, and there are no buyer-- no trade happens!
Here's what happens: if some of the big players start selling off some stock (and therefore the price dips) some other players will see this as an opportunity to buy some stock they've wanted for a while-- to buy at a bargain price!
THIS is the total nonsense. They talk the talk but don't walk the walk.
Your "disciplined approach" is the total nonsense as it doesn't happen overnight nor is it cost effective in the short run. I know few Dems who are for the steps required to remain energy independent to get past the short run. Just like some in our city council who claim they will be on 100% renewable energy in less than ten years. Not realistic at all without putting a HUGE added financial burden on their consumers. It's already started and their consumers have already had enough of the price hikes.
The added cost of renewable energy will be borne by the "little guy "Dems claim to be for. That's the dirty little secret Dems are either too stupid to realize or are trying to cover up.
A truly disciplined approach keeps fossil fuel sources as strong as possible until such time that alternate energy sources can de developed and are robust enough to handle peak power demands. It's a long game not a short one.
I know few Dems who understand that concept. You appear to be one of them. Right along with all the folks who liked your comment.
SOSDD for this place .....
A comment of pure butthurt
Lol yeah, keep telling yourself that.
The platform most Dems take reeks of anti energy independence. Solar power this and wind power that. In the meantime no one wants a solar panel farm or wind turbine in their backyard or sight-line. Nor do they want to pay for it. Unicorn farts won't get you there Don.
Really.
No i'm not but since that isn't happening i'm not concerned about it.
Woohoo ..... here we go!
Clearly you didn't have to wait in line then. Nothing bogus about it.
OPEC disrupted oil supplies and people were fighting for gas at the pumps.
Do you ever get tired of being wrong?
Lol ... how old are you again?
But by all means, don't let the truth hit ya, where the good Lord split ya .....
At least it would have a working horn.
9.1.26 Sparty On replied to Dismayed Patriot @ 9.1.10 3 hours ago
Dismayed Patroit is right. It is NOT "total nonsense". California is "walking the walk". California leads the league in pursuing clean renewable energy. They hit a home run with this solar initiative:
Not nearly as much as you do, sparty.
Cite
Every time right leaners come in to defend Trump, the place reeks of desperation. Total desperation. Just like this Trumplethinskin defender who got a lifetime ban from the Sesame Street theme park.
We've got solar panels on our house. I told my newish boyfriend I didn't want the house to look like a battery, so ours are strategically placed so they cannot be seen as you look at the front of the house. Our electric bills are now in the minus column even during these dog days of summer.
The whole planet should thank you for your service in the war against climate change.
What about all the old ones?
Doh!
Do try to keep up ..... the comment in question related to the Oil Crisis of 73 and was spot on.
Your girlfriends wrong and you're gonna be in trouble
Hey la, hey la, your girlfriend is wrong ..... and so are you
True, but Obama didn't impact it one way or the other, really. That's the point.
People talk about some president being "anti-oil" or "anti-coal" or whatever, but it's all nonsense. If the Saudis flood the oil market, US production decreases because the prices are too low. If technology reduces production costs, production increases because profits are higher.
I remember the uproar about opening the artic reserve to drilling...only for experts to point out you can only drill there for about 90 days/yr anyway because the weather makes it impossible the rest of the time.
It's like people who blame the decline of American manufacturing on some president and believe another president can somehow restore it. American manufacturing was crushed by the Panamax freighter. It became far cheaper to ship goods made with $1.50/hr labor than it was to pay $41.50/hr to US workers. That hasn't changed, and neither Obama nor Trump nor anyone else has the power to change it.
You are obviously trolling women just like your fearless leader.
Did get it did you?
Not a surprise really.
Nice. I would do it if I could afford it. I just have a ranch house and the whole backside of the house is in the sun all day.
Last time I looked an estimate for a DIY job was around 10k.
Sadly the federal solar tax credit is going to expire in 2022.
I would like to do this, also, even if just heats my hot water. But since I live in Arkansas, I could probably end up selling electricity back to Entergy
Yeah, my power company is a co-op. Reading from them they almost try to scare people. Talking about how excess power flows back into the system and you are the owner, shoulder responsibility of line staff and how a downed power line could endanger others and how improper connections could endanger the grid.
It almost reads like they don't want you to do it.
Of course they don't. They don't want to lose money
I don't think you two are talking about the same incident.
Are the "douchebags in Sacto" responsible for the homeless people in red states?
Here's an article about Moscow Mitch's state:
Used to live not too far from there
pretty cool place, especially the infighting between Christians and Muslims
I like when they do the American Gladiator battle with giant used Q tips, with greasy Yellow wax build up on the cotton swab ends
Israel has one of the most powerful conventional miitaries in the world (and in addition has had nukes for decades-- Iran of course still doesn't have any nukes). If Israel wanted to start a war with Iran they would've started one years ago.
Let the goddamn Sunnis and the godforsaken Shiites fight it out among themselves for once.
Been there-- done that.
in fact its been going on for a long time-- dies down, then flares up. Here's but one recent example:
Iran-Iraq war
The Iran–Iraq War began on 22 September 1980, when Iraq invaded Iran, and it ended on 20 August 1988, when Iran accepted the UN-brokered ceasefire.
Iraq wanted to replace Iran as the dominant Persian Gulf state, and was worried that the 1979 Iranian Revolution would lead Iraq's Shi'ite majority to rebel against the Ba'athist government. The war also followed a long history of border disputes, and Iraq planned to annex the oil-rich Khuzestan Province and the east bank of the Arvand Rud (Shatt al-Arab).
After eight years, war-weariness, economic problems, decreased morale, repeated Iranian military failures, recent Iraqi successes, Iraqi use of weapons of mass destruction, lack of international sympathy, and increased U.S.–Iran military tension all led to a ceasefire brokered by the United Nations.
An estimated 500,000 Iraqi and Iranian soldiers died, in addition to a smaller number of civilians. The end of the war resulted in neither reparations nor border changes.
FWIW, Saddam started two major wars.
And he used banned WMDs against Kurdish civilians as well as Iranian civilians and Iranian military. (But when Bush had us attack iraq they no longer had WMDs).
Saddam killed as many as 182,000 Kurds.
From Wikipedia:
And perhaps less widely known than Saddam's use of chemical weapons against the Kurds is his use of them against iranians:
Chemical attacks on Iran: When the US looked the other way
(Apr 2018)
(Excerpts):
US President Donald Trump announced on Friday the operation against Syria, framing his decision as a fight against "evil" while saying days earlier that preventing chemical attacks is "about humanity".
Trump's action against Syria, however, rings hollow to those who lived through the dangers of Iraq's chemical attacks in Iran during the Iran-Iraq War.
To some Iranian analysts, the air strikes reflected the "hypocrisy" and "duplicity" of American foreign policy.
When Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons to kill thousands of Iranians during the war from 1980 to 1988, not only did the US look the other way, but also "aided and abetted" Iraq in committing "war crimes", Reza Nasri, an Iran-born international law expert at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies (GIIDS) in Geneva, told Al Jazeera. "The claim that the recent US attack on Syria was motivated by humanitarian considerations is not consistent with Iran's own experience as a victim of chemical attacks," he said.
Throughout the Iran-Iraq war, an estimated 7,500 Iranian military and civilians were killed by Iraqi troops using nerve gas and mustard agents, according to a report by Shahriar Khateri, a senior official of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in The Hague.
The report said about a million Iranians were "exposed" to chemical agents during the war. Today, about 75,000 victims still receive treatment for "chronic chemical weapons injuries". (Read it all)
Should we..or would we?
If the question is why would we, there's a one word answer:
Its all about oil*.
If the Q is why should we, the one word answer is:
We shouldn't!
------------------------------------
P.S: And that's the real reason* we started the last war with Iraq
Trump said we should have taken Iraq's oil.
That would have been (another) war crime.
War. Good G-d, what is it good for?
PROPHETS!
War is good for prophets, profits, and profit prophets.
More like...PROFITS.
Music?
creating or prolonging a war has been a tried and true re-election gambit by rightwing knuckle draggers, for the last 51 years
Well come on all of you big strong men, Uncle Sam needs your help again,
he got himself in a terrible jam, way down yonder in Vietnam,
put down your books and pick up a gun, we're gunna have a whole lotta fun.
CHORUS
and its 1,2,3 what are we fightin for?
don't ask me i don't give a dam, the next stop is Vietnam,And its 5,6,7 open up the pearly gates. Well there aint no time to wonder why...WHOPEE we're all gunna die.
now come on wall street don't be slow, why man this's war a-go-go,
there's plenty good money to be made, supplyin' the army with the tools of the trade,
just hope and pray that when they drop the bomb, they drop it on the Vietcong.
CHORUS
now come on generals lets move fast, your big chance is here at last.
nite you go out and get those reds cuz the only good commie is one thats dead,
you know that peace can only be won, when you blow em all to kingdom come.
CHORUS
(spoken)- listen people i dont know you expect to ever stop the war if you cant sing any better than that... theres about 300,000 of you fuc|ers out there.. i want you to start singing..
CHORUS
now come on mothers throughout the land, pack your boys off to vietnam,
come on fathers don't hesitate, send your sons off before its too late,
be the first one on your block, to have your boy come home in a box
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 rocket's red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.
Oh, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
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! Oh long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!
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!
Between their loved home and the war's desolation!
Blest with victory 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!
Damn! You forgot the last line of the National Anthem: "PLAY BALL!"
The following song was the National Anthem of ButtHeads Nation on Newsvine.
(Please stand and remove your MAGA hat.)
Just kidding.
You're gonna need to go to View=Full Screen and make sure the Volume=Max.
And move a little closer to the screen so you can absorb the subliminal messages.
Okay, now play the video.
FUCK YEA
coming to save the MUTHER FCKN DAY !
Kinda like the famous Flying Toasters...!!!
(Anyone remember After Dark 3.0-- the famous Windows v3.11 Screen-Saver?)
* * *
Flying out of the sun
The smell of toast is in the air
When there's a job to be done
The Flying Toasters will be there!
And it's flap! Flap! Flap!
Now help is on the way
A victory song they si-ing
We pop up to save the day
On flying toaster wings!
In brightest day or after dark
When times of trouble are at hand
The flying toasters set a spark
And hope is blazing 'cross the land!
And it's flap! Flap! Flap!
Salvation from above
A precious gift they bri-ing
Gleaming angels of love
On flying toaster wings!
Actually it would be more accurate to say that its been a tactic used to gain power (election or no election) by those with aspirations of power on the Left, Right..and Center. And for more than 51 years..its more like centuries.
Wouldn't get to excited. Trump Administration has finally brought it out into the open for all to see--that--the prospect of war, the preparedness of war, and the political investments of war--have become yet another commodity.
The proof. "The Saudis pay cash." DJT
What do you think the odds are that we go to war with Iran?
Slim to none. The missiles probably were suppled by Israel.
... and paid for by the money they saved buying ISIL oil.
WTF?
Israel supplying missiles to Iran (a country that seeks to annihilate israel) -- or one of Iran's terrorist proxies?
Hezb'Allah? Hamas? Islamic Jihad perhaps?
What usually gets discussed is whether or not Trump will start an actual shooting war with Iran-- or vice-versa. There's no doubt in my mind that neither Iran 's leaders nor Trump definitely want to start a "shooting war". And by the same token, both sides love to fire up their base by the use of harsh rhetoric.
All of which isn't all that terrible.
But what does worry me is that accidents can happen-- and a real shooting war could be started by accident...
Israel would NEVER supply Iran with any weapons period.
The leaders of both countries are fucking mistake prone idiots.
Well-- not to the current Iranian government. But governments change, realities in the area change.
But as I'm sure you remember-- the Israelis actually colluded with Iran-- to attack a mutual enemy!
Yes-- they (the Israelis!!!) had a secret meeting with iranian representatives in Paris where they jointly conspired to destroy the nuclear reactor Sadam (well, actually the French) was building.
And in fact it was decided that Iran would strike first-- to destroy the reactor. So the Israelis agreed with the Iranians to hold back and let the Iranians do it.
And in fact it was decided that Iran would strike first-- to destroy the reactor. So the Israelis agreed with the Iranians to hold back and let the Iranians do it.
But they didn't suceed (IIRC that was because the Iraqi reactor was so close to Iran that the Iranian were afraid if their strike was too strong it might release radiation which would come to Iran)...
Here-- I just googled it and found this:
Iranian attack
Iran attacked and damaged the site on 30 September 1980, with two F-4 Phantoms , shortly after the outbreak of the Iran–Iraq War . [50] At the onset of the war, Yehoshua Saguy , director of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate , publicly urged the Iranians to bomb the reactor. [50] [51] The attack was the first on a nuclear reactor and only the third on a nuclear facility in history. It was also the first instance of a preventive attack on a nuclear reactor which aimed to forestall the development of a nuclear weapon. [51] [52] [53]
Due to last minute Iranian concerns that the reactor had been already fueled and could release radioactive fallout if hit, they did not attack the actual reactor dome, but the control room, research/centrifuge facilities, and the adjacent buildings. The targets were struck and the buildings were damaged, along with the plant cooling mechanisms. [54] Two other F-4s simultaneously hit Baghdad's main power plant, knocking the city's electricity out for nearly two days. The Iraqis denied any major damage. The French and Italian technicians promptly left Iraq, and nearly withdrew from the project, but some later returned in February 1981 and began to repair the damage. [54]
So after the iranian raid on the reactor failed, the israelis had to take it out.
Your alarm at my supposition is clearly understood and noted.
However, know this. There are many ( shady--very shady ) weapons dealers in the ME. And some are Israeli.
I would count nothing out. After all, do you really believe the Israelis' are sympathetic to the Saudi Regime funding the Madrassas? And this is but one thing among many others.
Yes unforeseen accidents could happen. The real danger are the many outside forces which are not controlled by The Coalition or Iran. These groups have their own agendas and answer to nobody. Their positions and loyalty are always suspect and shift with changing events. Unfortunately, they are well funded and have 'some of the major players' in untenable situations.
Neither the US or Iran wants or needs war. Militarily, Iran would suffer greatly. The ME would suffer worse. And the US could lose all standing, economic and political in the ME---possibly for decades.
That's a good way to put it-- that Trump wants war-- the preparedness owar, the investments of war-- and of course the rhetoric of war.
A while back I heard a news commentator with an interesting theory. When trump panders to his base by talking of his going to build a wall, much of his base doesn't really care all that much even if Trump doesn't succeed in building it-- they just love the fact that he fighting for it-- that he's really , really trying to get it built (over the objections of those evil "progressives" (AKA "Socialists"-- whatever that means)
They know that trump is "fighting for them"--they believe that, and that's enough for most of 'em.
They love Trump because they believe that The Donald hates the same people they hate (liberals, immigrants, minorities, etc.)
They also love Trump because the liberals, immigrants and minorities largely hate Trump. They are literally gleeful, giddy with delight at the thought that they pissed off another group of American citizen simply because they disagree with them or consider themselves superior or their opponents inferior. This is one major difference between the "left" and "right". Those on the left would never wish for a horrible embarrassment of a President simply to anger Republicans and poke religious conservatives in the eye out of spite.
Until I realized that, I had always wondered why, when Democrats criticize trump by mentioning how he hasn't fulfilled many of his campaign promises-- for example promising to build the Wall which he still hasn't done-- his supporters don't seem to care. How could that be?
Well, its like you just said-- as long as he hates the same people they do... they don't care about his failing to keep promises, lying to them about other stuff, cheating on his wife, etc, etc.
And that's the difference.
"fighting for them." ? ?
In other words, to cut to chase, 'fighting for nothing?'
"wish for a horrible embarrassment...."
Very probable Trump will deliver that onto himself.
You mean a gun just doesn't walk around shooting? It needs a "command" to fire? Don't let the anti-gun asshats hear that.
Not a requirement for the position.
Operation Desert Storm was executed before Congressional Approval. But that will be ignored because...Trump!!!!
It's funny that the people worried about war are those who won't be serving.
SOSDD ...... they are easy to spot. Others, who likely ate the big chicken dinner, not so much.
Oh, are you talking about The-Chicken-Hawk-in-Chief.
And all approved by the War Department (now DoD). But don't let a fact like that get in your way.
So nothing official? Never thought you'd give in to rumor mill garbage.
Are the fucking The National Archives official?
Go to this link to see a screen shot from The National Archives of Trump's Selective Service classifications:
According to The National Archives his classifications were:.
2-S 7/28/64 , 2-S 12/14/65, 1-A 11/22/66, 2-S 12/13/66, 2-S 1/16/68, 1-A 7/9/68, 1-Y 10/15/68, 4-F 2/1/72
Trump's campaign released a statement about Trump's draft status:
But the lottery was irrelevant to Trump because he received a 1-Y classification BEFORE the 1969 lottery. The fake bone spur letter got him the 1-Y classification.
People who had a 1-Y classification did not get drafted (probably because Vietnam was not a real war, because war was never declared).
Trump went on to get a 4-F so he would never have to serve in the military.
The 4-F classification means he is NOT qualified for military service so he should NOT be the Commander-in-Chief.
Show where it says that one needs a one A draft classification (or any other classification other than four F) in order to be president. What was Clinton's classification when he skipped out if the ROTC commitment he made and said he loathed the military?
Please cite.
We've got a 4-F Commander-in-Chief. Is that cool with you?
I would be cool with a genuine 4-F, butt Trump's 4-F was obtained with a fraudulent medical reason.
So does that mean you're not worried about war?
WTF?
Do you look forward to U.S. involvement in a war with Iran?
Let me rephrase - It's funny that the people complaining about war are those who won't be serving. These are the armchair generals who will sit safely in their living room while others actually fight.
Unlike MANY here on NT, I've been to war. But, at any rate, why would we go to war with Iran? Iran didn't attack the US. They hit Saudi Arabia.
Yet here we are sending troops to SA.
We've been sending troops to SA for quite a while. Been there 3 times myself between 91 and 2017.
So what is the point of sending US troops to SA currently...To help defend SA from Iranian attacks?
Gotta protect that oil.
Thank you for serving, I'm a Navy vet.
There is no war yet. You won't be serving in a potential war with Iran either butt you are advocating their position:
Trump has been backpedaling his threat so hopefully the U.S. will not bomb Iran.
So you're aware that on two of those occasions we went to war with Iraq.
I hesitated to post this song because it's so sad.
Butt, unfortunately, the Bone-Spur-in-Chief has made it relevant again.
Cool, using your logic that makes draft dodger in chief “Clinton” and never served in chief “Obama” relevant as well.
Prattle on about that for awhile.
I don't think either of them are in a position to attack Iran.