Surprise visit to war zone, Obama prods Afghans

**apisto** · 03-28-2010, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by Parallax

Sorry, forgot the "Warning, sarcasm ahead" sign.

Roger. I bit because I ever so vaguely remember a news report along that vein about 6 months or so ago. I will have to take a look for it when I get a chance.

Artesian · 03-28-2010, 03:04 PM

Originally posted by Parallax

To which President Hamid Karzai replied "I will if you will."

They won't and he won't. I guess the Lib party is a party of won'ts.
A

**apisto** · 03-28-2010, 03:06 PM

Originally posted by Artesian

I think that his decision should have been to get out of Iraq, and also out of Afghanistan as soon as he was sworn in. I see of no good being there. It will not make any difference except to have more of our soldiers killed or maimed.
A

I do not view the situations as that cut and dry, however I respect that point of view highly.

---------- Post added 03-28-2010 at 04:08 PM ----------

Originally posted by Artesian

They won't and he won't. I guess the Lib party is a party of won'ts.
A

Truly, Artesian, do you believe either the Repubs or Dems are anywhere close to having that market cornered?

Artesian · 03-28-2010, 03:19 PM

Originally posted by apisto

I do not view the situations as that cut and dry, however I respect that point of view highly.

---------- Post added 03-28-2010 at 04:08 PM ----------

Truly, Artesian, do you believe either the Repubs or Dems are anywhere close to having that market cornered?

It is not that cut and dry but even after all the diplomacy and deals are worked out the results will be the same.

Not by themselves. There is the rest of the world who are also won"ts. I just thought that since the Repub. party is called the party of "No" that the repubs should call the lib party the party of "wont's". It just seems to fit well. Well, maybe the party of "Yes". Yes to socialism/marxism, yes to corruption, yes to demonizing, yes to screwing over our allies, yes to running down the USA, yes to taking over the total capitolistic system and making it government run.
A

Last edited by Artesian; 03-28-2010 at 03:27 PM.

Rupert · 03-28-2010, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Quote Originally posted by Artesian Quote
I think that his decision should have been to get out of Iraq, and also out of Afghanistan as soon as he was sworn in. I see of no good being there. It will not make any difference except to have more of our soldiers killed or maimed.
A

If I was not here, I would have to agree with that Steve, but I have a job here and it won't allow much compromise....the place would surely start going to hell if we do too much of that, and I have already reached my daily limit of niceties.
Regards!

**apisto** · 03-28-2010, 03:27 PM

Originally posted by Artesian

It is not that cut and dry but even after all the diplomacy and deals are worked out the results will be the same.

Maybe, I just don't know. That is how Eisenhower regarded the Korean War, seemingly. And after he got us out, the world, nor the United States came to an end, so maybe you are right.

Artesian · 03-28-2010, 03:30 PM

Originally posted by Rupert

If I was not here, I would have to agree with that Steve, but I have a job here and it won't allow much compromise....the place would surely start going to hell if we do too much of that, and I have already reached my daily limit of niceties.
Regards!

I fully understand and you are forgiven.
A

---------- Post added 03-28-2010 at 05:32 PM ----------

Originally posted by Ratmagiclady

Dude. This is a board full of *photographers.*

'Arrogant-looking' is just a matter of leaning on the shutter and picking a frame.

Add caption.

(That is, assuming you aren't linking to a thumbnail-sized photo in the first place. Then it's *all* caption.)

Dudette,
Sorry about the lousy picture. I did not take the photo. All I could get was a thumbnail. Please forgive me.
A

Wheatfield · 03-28-2010, 03:36 PM

Originally posted by Artesian

I think that his decision should have been to get out of Iraq, and also out of Afghanistan as soon as he was sworn in. I see of no good being there. It will not make any difference except to have more of our soldiers killed or maimed.
A

More of your soldiers killed, more of their civilians killed, and ultimately, no one will thank you for it anyway.
In fact, intervening is probably counter productive, in that mostly what we (and I include Canada, since we are in Khandahar) is to create more hatred for the west, and more terrorists.

Iraq is a fools game, and Afghanistan isn't much better.
No one is going to import democracy into the region, and no one is going to do anything about the tribal rivalries that exist.
They have to sort this out themselves.
It was summed up best by a fellow who said that sending the military into those places is like sticking your hand into a bucket of warm water and stirring it.
You can appear to be doing something, but all you are really doing is making yourself piss your pants, and when you take your hand out, the water goes back to how it was before you started stirring.

Artesian · 03-28-2010, 03:36 PM

Originally posted by apisto

Maybe, I just don't know. That is how Eisenhower regarded the Korean War, seemingly. And after he got us out, the world, nor the United States came to an end, so maybe you are right.

We are still there. Ny niece just returned from Korea. Why we are there I have no idea. Germany, Japan, etc. etc.
A

---------- Post added 03-28-2010 at 05:40 PM ----------

Originally posted by Wheatfield

More of your soldiers killed, more of their civilians killed, and ultimately, no one will thank you for it anyway.
In fact, intervening is probably counter productive, in that mostly what we (and I include Canada, since we are in Khandahar) is to create more hatred for the west, and more terrorists.

Iraq is a fools game, and Afghanistan isn't much better.
No one is going to import democracy into the region, and no one is going to do anything about the tribal rivalries that exist.
They have to sort this out themselves.
It was summed up best by a fellow who said that sending the military into those places is like sticking your hand into a bucket of warm water and stirring it.
You can appear to be doing something, but all you are really doing is making yourself piss your pants, and when you take your hand out, the water goes back to how it was before you started stirring.

Darn, I agree with you. That is a first and maybe a last, who knows. I like the bucket summation.
A

**apisto** · 03-28-2010, 03:41 PM

Originally posted by Artesian

We are still there. Ny niece just returned from Korea. Why we are there I have no idea. Germany, Japan, etc. etc.
A

Of course. I meant out of the large scale conflict.

Parallax · 03-28-2010, 03:48 PM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

More of your soldiers killed, more of their civilians killed, and ultimately, no one will thank you for it anyway.
In fact, intervening is probably counter productive, in that mostly what we (and I include Canada, since we are in Khandahar) is to create more hatred for the west, and more terrorists.

Iraq is a fools game, and Afghanistan isn't much better.
No one is going to import democracy into the region, and no one is going to do anything about the tribal rivalries that exist.
They have to sort this out themselves.
It was summed up best by a fellow who said that sending the military into those places is like sticking your hand into a bucket of warm water and stirring it.
You can appear to be doing something, but all you are really doing is making yourself piss your pants, and when you take your hand out, the water goes back to how it was before you started stirring.

I think you are right about ALL of that with one exception. I don't think it is possible to generate more hatred for the West than there is now. I say that from the standpoint that there are no degrees of hate. There are different degrees of dislike, the epitome of which is hate. The Arab countries hate the West.

Artesian · 03-28-2010, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by Parallax

I think you are right about ALL of that with one exception. I don't think it is possible to generate more hatred for the West than there is now. I say that from the standpoint that there are no degrees of hate. There are different degrees of dislike, the epitome of which is hate. The Arab countries hate the West.

Jim,
You nailed it.
A

Rupert · 03-28-2010, 04:15 PM

Damn....here it is early in the evening and I find a need to agree with all of you, but am completely out of nicieties for the day! Would it be acceptable if I told you all that I strongly agree, but still want you all to go straight to hell? Would that count for anything? Would it still tarnish my reputation? This is so frustrating, and it is only 6PM!
Beast Regards!

Parallax · 03-28-2010, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by Rupert

Damn....here it is early in the evening and I find a need to agree with all of you, but am completely out of nicieties for the day! Would it be acceptable if I told you all that I strongly agree, but still want you all to go straight to hell? Would that count for anything? Would it still tarnish my reputation? This is so frustrating, and it is only 6PM!
Beast Regards!

That works for me! Your reputation is safe.

Rupert · 03-28-2010, 04:51 PM

Thanks, and I will assume you speak for the others.......I sure wouldn't want anyone to think old Rupert is going soft in his old age. Just because Mrs Rupert bosses me around is no reason to assume I am losing my grip.....this is nothing new, it has gone on for most of 45 years now.......it may be why I am mostly such a nice guy here....no frustrations to take out on others.
Best Regards!

I tried to trade her off to this old guy a while back, but after five minutes of listening to her demands to go shopping, he brought her back.....too bad, he had a damn nice tractor.....

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Who uses the Zone System?	hockmasm	Pentax DSLR Discussion	17	05-30-2010 12:23 PM
It is Official. Obama is a War Criminal!	Artesian	General Talk	190	04-05-2010 06:51 AM
My Imperial War Museum visit...	paulyrichard	Post Your Photos!	11	05-31-2009 11:31 AM
Zone VI spotmeter	aaron Pazanti	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	1	03-27-2009 02:03 PM
AF Zone Experiment	NeverSatisfied	Pentax DSLR Discussion	44	03-26-2009 11:21 AM

03-28-2010, 03:03 PM	#16
apisto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Minnesota Posts: 588	Originally posted by Parallax Sorry, forgot the "Warning, sarcasm ahead" sign. Roger. I bit because I ever so vaguely remember a news report along that vein about 6 months or so ago. I will have to take a look for it when I get a chance.

03-28-2010, 03:04 PM	#17
Artesian Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 365 Original Poster	Originally posted by Parallax To which President Hamid Karzai replied "I will if you will." They won't and he won't. I guess the Lib party is a party of won'ts. A

03-28-2010, 03:06 PM	#18
apisto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Minnesota Posts: 588	Originally posted by Artesian I think that his decision should have been to get out of Iraq, and also out of Afghanistan as soon as he was sworn in. I see of no good being there. It will not make any difference except to have more of our soldiers killed or maimed. A I do not view the situations as that cut and dry, however I respect that point of view highly. ---------- Post added 03-28-2010 at 04:08 PM ---------- Originally posted by Artesian They won't and he won't. I guess the Lib party is a party of won'ts. A Truly, Artesian, do you believe either the Repubs or Dems are anywhere close to having that market cornered?

03-28-2010, 03:19 PM	#19
Artesian Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 365 Original Poster	Originally posted by apisto I do not view the situations as that cut and dry, however I respect that point of view highly. ---------- Post added 03-28-2010 at 04:08 PM ---------- Truly, Artesian, do you believe either the Repubs or Dems are anywhere close to having that market cornered? It is not that cut and dry but even after all the diplomacy and deals are worked out the results will be the same. Not by themselves. There is the rest of the world who are also won"ts. I just thought that since the Repub. party is called the party of "No" that the repubs should call the lib party the party of "wont's". It just seems to fit well. Well, maybe the party of "Yes". Yes to socialism/marxism, yes to corruption, yes to demonizing, yes to screwing over our allies, yes to running down the USA, yes to taking over the total capitolistic system and making it government run. A Last edited by Artesian; 03-28-2010 at 03:27 PM.

03-28-2010, 03:20 PM	#20
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Quote: Quote Originally posted by Artesian Quote I think that his decision should have been to get out of Iraq, and also out of Afghanistan as soon as he was sworn in. I see of no good being there. It will not make any difference except to have more of our soldiers killed or maimed. A If I was not here, I would have to agree with that Steve, but I have a job here and it won't allow much compromise....the place would surely start going to hell if we do too much of that, and I have already reached my daily limit of niceties. Regards!

03-28-2010, 03:27 PM	#21
apisto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Minnesota Posts: 588	Originally posted by Artesian It is not that cut and dry but even after all the diplomacy and deals are worked out the results will be the same. Maybe, I just don't know. That is how Eisenhower regarded the Korean War, seemingly. And after he got us out, the world, nor the United States came to an end, so maybe you are right.

03-28-2010, 03:30 PM	#22
Artesian Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 365 Original Poster	Originally posted by Rupert If I was not here, I would have to agree with that Steve, but I have a job here and it won't allow much compromise....the place would surely start going to hell if we do too much of that, and I have already reached my daily limit of niceties. Regards! I fully understand and you are forgiven. A ---------- Post added 03-28-2010 at 05:32 PM ---------- Originally posted by Ratmagiclady Dude. This is a board full of photographers. 'Arrogant-looking' is just a matter of leaning on the shutter and picking a frame. Add caption. (That is, assuming you aren't linking to a thumbnail-sized photo in the first place. Then it's all caption.) Dudette, Sorry about the lousy picture. I did not take the photo. All I could get was a thumbnail. Please forgive me. A

03-28-2010, 03:36 PM	#23
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,976	Originally posted by Artesian I think that his decision should have been to get out of Iraq, and also out of Afghanistan as soon as he was sworn in. I see of no good being there. It will not make any difference except to have more of our soldiers killed or maimed. A More of your soldiers killed, more of their civilians killed, and ultimately, no one will thank you for it anyway. In fact, intervening is probably counter productive, in that mostly what we (and I include Canada, since we are in Khandahar) is to create more hatred for the west, and more terrorists. Iraq is a fools game, and Afghanistan isn't much better. No one is going to import democracy into the region, and no one is going to do anything about the tribal rivalries that exist. They have to sort this out themselves. It was summed up best by a fellow who said that sending the military into those places is like sticking your hand into a bucket of warm water and stirring it. You can appear to be doing something, but all you are really doing is making yourself piss your pants, and when you take your hand out, the water goes back to how it was before you started stirring.

03-28-2010, 03:36 PM	#24
Artesian Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 365 Original Poster	Originally posted by apisto Maybe, I just don't know. That is how Eisenhower regarded the Korean War, seemingly. And after he got us out, the world, nor the United States came to an end, so maybe you are right. We are still there. Ny niece just returned from Korea. Why we are there I have no idea. Germany, Japan, etc. etc. A ---------- Post added 03-28-2010 at 05:40 PM ---------- Originally posted by Wheatfield More of your soldiers killed, more of their civilians killed, and ultimately, no one will thank you for it anyway. In fact, intervening is probably counter productive, in that mostly what we (and I include Canada, since we are in Khandahar) is to create more hatred for the west, and more terrorists. Iraq is a fools game, and Afghanistan isn't much better. No one is going to import democracy into the region, and no one is going to do anything about the tribal rivalries that exist. They have to sort this out themselves. It was summed up best by a fellow who said that sending the military into those places is like sticking your hand into a bucket of warm water and stirring it. You can appear to be doing something, but all you are really doing is making yourself piss your pants, and when you take your hand out, the water goes back to how it was before you started stirring. Darn, I agree with you. That is a first and maybe a last, who knows. I like the bucket summation. A

03-28-2010, 03:41 PM	#25
apisto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Minnesota Posts: 588	Originally posted by Artesian We are still there. Ny niece just returned from Korea. Why we are there I have no idea. Germany, Japan, etc. etc. A Of course. I meant out of the large scale conflict.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-28-2010, 03:48 PM	#26
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by Wheatfield More of your soldiers killed, more of their civilians killed, and ultimately, no one will thank you for it anyway. In fact, intervening is probably counter productive, in that mostly what we (and I include Canada, since we are in Khandahar) is to create more hatred for the west, and more terrorists. Iraq is a fools game, and Afghanistan isn't much better. No one is going to import democracy into the region, and no one is going to do anything about the tribal rivalries that exist. They have to sort this out themselves. It was summed up best by a fellow who said that sending the military into those places is like sticking your hand into a bucket of warm water and stirring it. You can appear to be doing something, but all you are really doing is making yourself piss your pants, and when you take your hand out, the water goes back to how it was before you started stirring. I think you are right about ALL of that with one exception. I don't think it is possible to generate more hatred for the West than there is now. I say that from the standpoint that there are no degrees of hate. There are different degrees of dislike, the epitome of which is hate. The Arab countries hate the West.

03-28-2010, 04:04 PM	#27
Artesian Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 365 Original Poster	Originally posted by Parallax I think you are right about ALL of that with one exception. I don't think it is possible to generate more hatred for the West than there is now. I say that from the standpoint that there are no degrees of hate. There are different degrees of dislike, the epitome of which is hate. The Arab countries hate the West. Jim, You nailed it. A

03-28-2010, 04:15 PM	#28
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Damn....here it is early in the evening and I find a need to agree with all of you, but am completely out of nicieties for the day! Would it be acceptable if I told you all that I strongly agree, but still want you all to go straight to hell? Would that count for anything? Would it still tarnish my reputation? This is so frustrating, and it is only 6PM! Beast Regards!

03-28-2010, 04:17 PM	#29
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by Rupert Damn....here it is early in the evening and I find a need to agree with all of you, but am completely out of nicieties for the day! Would it be acceptable if I told you all that I strongly agree, but still want you all to go straight to hell? Would that count for anything? Would it still tarnish my reputation? This is so frustrating, and it is only 6PM! Beast Regards! That works for me! Your reputation is safe.

03-28-2010, 04:51 PM	#30
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Thanks, and I will assume you speak for the others.......I sure wouldn't want anyone to think old Rupert is going soft in his old age. Just because Mrs Rupert bosses me around is no reason to assume I am losing my grip.....this is nothing new, it has gone on for most of 45 years now.......it may be why I am mostly such a nice guy here....no frustrations to take out on others. Best Regards! I tried to trade her off to this old guy a while back, but after five minutes of listening to her demands to go shopping, he brought her back.....too bad, he had a damn nice tractor.....