The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-17-2014, 05:20 PM   #51
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,995
Default

gaffe, why would the US launch a first-strike against Russia? What would America gain?

Expain, please.
W*GS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2014, 05:25 PM   #52
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default

W*gs, who was George Kennan?
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 07:38 AM   #53
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,995
Default

gaffe, why would the US launch a first-strike against Russia? What would America gain?

Expain, please.
W*GS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 02:57 PM   #54
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default

W*gs, who was George Kennan?
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 02:58 PM   #55
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default Ron Paul talks truth about Ukraine

A new House bill will allocate $10 billion for more US meddling in Ukraine -- and more war. MHG

Ukraine: The Fuse Has Been Lit
The Russian Aggression Prevention Act of 2114

http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle38527.htm
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2014, 08:19 PM   #56
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,995
Default

gaffe, how many Jews died in the Holocaust?
W*GS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2014, 08:28 PM   #57
The Lone Bolt
Ring of Famer
 
The Lone Bolt's Avatar
 
GO CHARGERS!!!!

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Boredom Capital of the Universe (Everett, WA)
Posts: 3,259
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by W*GS View Post
gaffe, why would the US launch a first-strike against Russia? What would America gain?

Expain, please.
Radioactive caviar. Their plan is to breed a race of indestructible radioactive fishmen.

]
The Lone Bolt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2014, 11:36 PM   #58
BroncsRule
Perennial Pro-bowler
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 990

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
A new House bill will allocate $10 billion for more US meddling in Ukraine -- and more war. MHG

Ukraine: The Fuse Has Been Lit
The Russian Aggression Prevention Act of 2114

http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle38527.htm
Well, at least we have 100 years.

That's a pretty long fuse.
BroncsRule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2014, 12:58 PM   #59
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncsRule View Post
Well, at least we have 100 years.

That's a pretty long fuse.
Surely you jest.

Here's the timeline to nuclear war posted by the atomic scientists. We are 5 minutes away on a 24 X 7 basis:
Attached Images
File Type: png atomic clock copy.png (2.1 KB, 64 views)
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2014, 01:38 PM   #60
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 55,129

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
Radioactive caviar. Their plan is to breed a race of indestructible radioactive fishmen.

]
I grew up with a model of that guy on my dresser.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2014, 07:35 PM   #61
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,995
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
Surely you jest.

Here's the timeline to nuclear war posted by the atomic scientists. We are 5 minutes away on a 24 X 7 basis:
Because of the US alone?
W*GS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2014, 05:18 PM   #62
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default

Did Russia build missile bases on the US border?

Did Russia stir up ethnic/political unrest in Canada or Mexico?

Did Russia stage a false flag chemical attack?

Did Russia vomit a continuous litany of threats?

No to all of the above. The World Polls are correct. The greatest threat to world peace comes from the US/Israel.
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2014, 04:08 PM   #63
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default

Are You Ready For Nuclear War?
By Paul Craig Roberts

June 04, 2014 "ICH"
- Pay close attention to Steven Starr’s guest column, “The Lethality of Nuclear Weapons.” http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014...clear-weapons/ Washington thinks nuclear war can be won and is planning for a first strike on Russia, and perhaps China, in order to prevent any challenge to Washington’s world hegemony.

The plan is far advanced, and the implementation of the plan is underway. As I have reported previously, US strategic doctrine was changed and the role of nuclear missiles was elevated from a retaliatory role to an offensive first strike role. US anti-ballistic missile (ABM) bases have been established in Poland on Russia’s frontier, and other bases are planned. When completed Russia will be ringed with US missile bases.

Anti-ballistic missiles, known as “star wars,” are weapons designed to intercept and destroy ICBMs. In Washington’s war doctrine, the US hits Russia with a first strike, and whatever retaliatory force Russia might have remaining is prevented from reaching the US by the shield of ABMs.

The reason Washington gave for the change in war doctrine is the possibility that terrorists might obtain a nuclear weapon with which to destroy an American city. This explanation is nonsensical. Terrorists are individuals or a group of individuals, not a country with a threatening military. To use nuclear weapons against terrorists would destroy far more than the terrorists and be pointless as a drone with a conventional missile would suffice.

The reason Washington gave for the ABM base in Poland is to protect Europe from Iranian ICBMs. Washington and every European government knows that Iran has no ICBMs and that Iran has not indicated any intent to attack Europe.

No government believes Washington’s reasons. Every government realizes that Washington’s reasons are feeble attempts to hide the fact that it is creating the capability on the ground to win a nuclear war.

http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle38702.htm
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2014, 04:44 PM   #64
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 55,129

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Bolt View Post
Radioactive caviar. Their plan is to breed a race of indestructible radioactive fishmen.

]
I hear they've got these swimming around in the waters off F u k ushima now. No kidding! I heard it!
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 05:47 AM   #65
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,995
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
Every government realizes that Washington’s reasons are feeble attempts to hide the fact that it is creating the capability on the ground to win a nuclear war.
Please define what "win a nuclear war" means.
W*GS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 05:49 AM   #66
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,995
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
The greatest threat to world peace comes from the US/Israel.
"US/Israel" meaning "ZOG/Jews".
W*GS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 12:32 PM   #67
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default

PCR prefaced his article with a link to a paper explaining (once again) that no one can win a nuclear war. Everyone looses.

The question is how come our leaders [sic] don't understand this? How come they are preparing for nuclear war -- as if they intend to prevail?

Obama just announced a $600 billion increase in NATO spending. For what purpose? Who is the enemy? Russia? That's a joke.

No foreign enemies pose a military threat to the survival of the USA. The only enemies with the power to destroy the USA live here among us.

Exposing them and bringing them to justice should be priority number one.
MHG
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2014, 11:51 AM   #68
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default The world of Orwell is now

Another spot on analysis by PCR. Are Americans too far gone to care? It would appear so, judging from the partisan tripe on this board. MHG

The Lies Grow More Audacious
By Paul Craig Roberts

June 07, 2014 "ICH" -
If there were any doubts that Western “leaders” live in a fantasy make-believe world constructed out of their own lies, the G-7 meeting and 70th anniversary celebration of the Normandy landing dispelled the doubts.

The howlers issuing from these occasions are enough to split your sides. Obama and his lap dog Cameron described the Normandy landing on June 6, 1944, as “the greatest liberation force that the world has ever known” and took all the credit for the US and Britain for the defeat of Hitler. No mention was made of the Soviet Union and the Red Army, which for three years prior to the Normandy landing had been fighting and defeating the Wehrmacht.

The Germans lost World War II at the Battle of Stalingrad, which was fought from August 23, 1942 until February 2, 1943, when most of the remnants of the powerful German Sixth Army surrendered, including 22 generals.

Nineteen months previously the largest invasion force ever assembled on planet earth invaded Russia across a one thousand mile front. Three million crack German troops; 7,500 artillery units, 19 panzer divisions with 3,000 tanks, and 2,500 aircraft rolled across Russia for 14 months.

By June 1944, three years later, very little of this force was left. The Red Army had chewed it up. When the so-called “allies” (a term which apparently excludes Russia) landed in France, there was little to resist them. The best forces remaining to Hitler were on the Russian front, which collapsed day by day as the Red Army approached Berlin.

The Red Army won the war with Germany. The Americans and the British showed up after the Wehrmacht was exhausted and in tatters and could offer little resistance. Joseph Stalin believed that Washington and London stayed out of the war until the last minute and left Russia with the burden of defeating Germany.

Hollywood and popular writers have, of course, buried the facts.

for the rest

http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle38726.htm
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2014, 12:52 PM   #69
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,995
Default

Why are you sucking off Stalin, der gaffen-fuehrer?
W*GS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2014, 01:03 PM   #70
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,492

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
Another spot on analysis by PCR. Are Americans too far gone to care? It would appear so, judging from the partisan tripe on this board. MHG

The Lies Grow More Audacious
By Paul Craig Roberts

June 07, 2014 "ICH" -
If there were any doubts that Western “leaders” live in a fantasy make-believe world constructed out of their own lies, the G-7 meeting and 70th anniversary celebration of the Normandy landing dispelled the doubts.

The howlers issuing from these occasions are enough to split your sides. Obama and his lap dog Cameron described the Normandy landing on June 6, 1944, as “the greatest liberation force that the world has ever known” and took all the credit for the US and Britain for the defeat of Hitler. No mention was made of the Soviet Union and the Red Army, which for three years prior to the Normandy landing had been fighting and defeating the Wehrmacht.

The Germans lost World War II at the Battle of Stalingrad, which was fought from August 23, 1942 until February 2, 1943, when most of the remnants of the powerful German Sixth Army surrendered, including 22 generals.

Nineteen months previously the largest invasion force ever assembled on planet earth invaded Russia across a one thousand mile front. Three million crack German troops; 7,500 artillery units, 19 panzer divisions with 3,000 tanks, and 2,500 aircraft rolled across Russia for 14 months.

By June 1944, three years later, very little of this force was left. The Red Army had chewed it up. When the so-called “allies” (a term which apparently excludes Russia) landed in France, there was little to resist them. The best forces remaining to Hitler were on the Russian front, which collapsed day by day as the Red Army approached Berlin.

The Red Army won the war with Germany. The Americans and the British showed up after the Wehrmacht was exhausted and in tatters and could offer little resistance. Joseph Stalin believed that Washington and London stayed out of the war until the last minute and left Russia with the burden of defeating Germany.

Hollywood and popular writers have, of course, buried the facts.

for the rest

http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle38726.htm
So now you quote Stalin to support your nonsense??

The German surface navy was either destroyed or bottled up by 1941 and their air force was reduced significantly in the BoB.....all before Germany was at war with Russia.

The Germans were defeated at El Alamein the year before Stalingrad.

German cities were being reduced to ashes by the RAF and USAF. All before D day.

No one denies Russia's sacrifice, but Stalin was another Hitler, a liar and genocidal maniac. But he's your new hero??

Go and read some history, wacko, and take the idiot PCR with you.

Last edited by DenverBrit; 06-07-2014 at 01:11 PM..
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2014, 03:00 PM   #71
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default

Loonies like Brit cannot answer the question, why is the US arming/training Islamic rebels in Syria? Last year -- Al Qaeda militia over-ran the headquarters of the so called "moderate" rebels -- basically kicked them out of the country.

This is probably why Kurds and Christians in Syria are now fighting alongside Hezbollah and the Syrian army against Al Qaeda.

So why is Obama supporting "moderate" Islamicists?

National Security Adviser Susan Rice says she is "heartbroken" at the devastation and casualties in Syria. So why is she making the situation worse?

I thought Al Qaeda was the enemy? Duh--WTF??
MHG


US Providing “Lethal” Support to Syrian Rebels

By Agence France-Presse

June 07, 2014 "ICH" - "AFP" -
- - President Barack Obama’s top foreign policy advisor Susan Rice on Friday said Washington was providing “lethal and non-lethal” support to select members of the Syrian opposition, offering more detail than usual on US assistance.
Top Obama administration officials typically decline to say exactly what equipment, arms or ammunition the United States is providing to moderate Syrian opposition forces.

But President Barack Obama said in a major foreign policy speech last week that the United States would “ramp up” support for rebels fighting President Bashar al-Assad.

National Security Advisor Susan Rice said in an interview with CNN while she was traveling with Obama to D-Day 70th anniversary celebrations in Normandy that she was heartbroken about the carnage in Syria’s civil war.

“That’s why the United States has ramped up its support for the moderate vetted opposition, providing lethal and non-lethal support where we can to support both the civilian opposition and the military opposition.”

Officials normally publicly refuse to comment on exactly what they are doing to train opposition groups.

National Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden declined to say whether Rice was announcing a new US policy by apparently being more open on US assistance.

“We’re not in a position to detail all of our assistance, but as we’ve made clear, we provide both military and non-military assistance to the opposition,” Hayden said.

Signs of a deepening commitment to Syrian rebels come three weeks after Obama met the head of the opposition National Coalition, Ahmad Jarba in Washington last month.

Officially, US support for rebel fighters in Syria has been limited to non-lethal aid amounting to $287 million, though the CIA reportedly participates in a secret programme to train moderate rebels in Jordan.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/06/0...-syrian-rebel/
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2014, 03:11 PM   #72
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,492

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
Loonies like Brit cannot answer the question, why is the US arming/training Islamic rebels in Syria? Last year -- Al Qaeda militia over-ran the headquarters of the so called "moderate" rebels -- basically kicked them out of the country.

This is probably why Kurds and Christians in Syria are now fighting alongside Hezbollah and the Syrian army against Al Qaeda.

So why is Obama supporting "moderate" Islamicists?

National Security Adviser Susan Rice says she is "heartbroken" at the devastation and casualties in Syria. So why is she making the situation worse?

I thought Al Qaeda was the enemy? Duh--WTF??
MHG

WTF has that got to do with your leg humping of Stalin??
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2014, 12:16 PM   #73
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBrit View Post
So now you quote Stalin to support your nonsense??

The German surface navy was either destroyed or bottled up by 1941 and their air force was reduced significantly in the BoB.....all before Germany was at war with Russia.

The Germans were defeated at El Alamein the year before Stalingrad.

German cities were being reduced to ashes by the RAF and USAF. All before D day.


No one denies Russia's sacrifice, but Stalin was another Hitler, a liar and genocidal maniac. But he's your new hero??

Go and read some history, wacko, and take the idiot PCR with you.
This wacko nonsense passes for reality in America today?

Rommel's defeat in N Africa was not decisive -- nor was the allied bombing of German cities.

Brit needs to read INSIDE THE THIRD REICH by Albert Speer, the genius who took Hitler's war machine underground. Nazi war production never faltered despite the allied bombing.

The critical factor was the shortage of fuel to run the tanks and planes. Witness the battle of the bulge - a desperate attempt by the Nazis to break through the allied line and capture a huge fuel depot.

This is why Stalingrad was decisive. Had the Nazis won this key battle they would have seized the oil fields of the Caucasus -- and solved the fuel problem.

Hitler would then have concentrated his forces in the West. The landing at Normandy would have ended in disaster - or more likely Churchill and FDR would have canceled it.

German tanks were superior. German fighter jets -- introduced in the last months of the war -- were far superior to anything the US had.

With unlimited fuel -- Goering's jet fighters would have swept the USAF and the RAF from the skies over Germany. Hitler would have maintained control over Europe.

The US would have had to use atomic weapons to win the war.

Hence the importance of Stalingrad.

The moral question remains -- the fact that the US stood aside and allowed the Nazis and Russians to duke it out -- destroying one another.
PCR is right on. Brit and others like him are worse than stupid -- they are fools. MHG
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2014, 12:24 PM   #74
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,995
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
German tanks were superior.
Nope. They were outclassed by 1943.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
German fighter jets -- introduced in the last months of the war -- were far superior to anything the US had.
Too few in number and poorly used to be relevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
With unlimited fuel -- Goering's jet fighters would have swept the USAF and the RAF from the skies over Germany. Hitler would have maintained control over Europe.
Nope. Not enough planes or pilots for the Luftwaffe. The USAAC and RAF had control of European skies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
The US would have had to use atomic weapons to win the war.
Nope.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
The moral question remains -- the fact that the US stood aside and allowed the Nazis and Russians to duke it out -- destroying one another.
Ever hear of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact?
W*GS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2014, 01:52 PM   #75
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default

W*gs,

The 1939 non aggression pact between Hitler and Stalin (which enabled both to carve up Poland) ceased to exist when Hitler launched operation Barbarossa in 1941 -- one of the most massive invasions in history.

You are as ignorant and stupid as Brit. (smile)
MHG
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:05 PM.


Denver Broncos