[Johny Joe Hold]

After so many years in politics, I have come to be good at reading code language. For example, when our heroic President Bush said Sadam had "weapons of mass destruction", I knew we would soon invade.

That is why I was delighted to read this headline today in the Wall Street Journal:

U.S. Says Syria Plans Gas Attack in Rebel Stronghold

If ever there was perfect code language for "We are going to bomb Syria" it would be this.

And what great news this is for those of us who want our great President to be reelected. Nothing is better in Presidential politics than a President managing a war.

This is such a relief after the weeks of bad news for our President.

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

COMMANDER IN CHIEF, SIR YES SIR! It gives me chills thinking about every Senator, Congressman and federal Judge lined up in front of the Executive of the United States of America saluting and swearing allegiance. It frankly baffles me why we didn't do it this way all along.

[Johny Joe Hold]

Originally Posted by Dr. Anthony J. Toole

COMMANDER IN CHIEF, SIR YES SIR! It gives me chills thinking about every Senator, Congressman and federal Judge lined up in front of the Executive of the United States of America saluting and swearing allegiance. It frankly baffles me why we didn't do it this way all along.

Today's resignation of John Bolton, National Security Adviser, was misinterpreted by the world's press. The press is saying Bolton was too hawkish and the President needed someone who was not as enthusiastic to find some place in invade.

Exactly the opposite was the case. The President knew our friend, John, was hawkish when he appointed him. Trump knows a war will be good for his reelection.

Think of W. Bush. He invaded Iraq because he thought there were weapons of mass destruction. Later Bush had to admit the weapons were not there. There was an election coming up and several pundits thought Bush's mistake would cause him to be defeated. But, no. We were in a war. Voters thought it best to stay with the current Commander in Chief because he had been handling things for four years. Reagan pulled off the same genius move with a 24 hour capture of Granada.

President Trump took note of that. With polling numbers lower than he would like he knows voters will not want to change Commanders in the middle of a war. So, he needs to get one started soon.

Bolton just could not get the job done. I'm certain the President will either get a real hawk in that position or name himself National Security Adviser and invade some small country soon.

[Didymus Much]

Originally Posted by Johny Joe Hold

...I'm certain the President will ... name himself National Security Adviser and invade some small country soon.

How about Puerto Rico?

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

Originally Posted by Didymus Much

How about Puerto Rico?

Insolence noted. Just don't be surprized when recruiters show up at your door looking for the low draft numbers.

[Johny Joe Hold]

Originally Posted by Dr. Anthony J. Toole

Insolence noted. Just don't be surprized when recruiters show up at your door looking for the low draft numbers.

Thank you, Dr. Toole, for pointing out the need for atheists to perform the duties of war. Young Christian men are needed here in the U.S. to father soldiers for Jesus and fight sin wherever it shows up.

[WilliamJenningsBryan]

Originally Posted by Didymus Much

How about Puerto Rico?

You occasionally display some intelligence around here Munch, which is probably why the administrators haven't banned you yet.

Perhaps you're unaware that we already own Puerto Rico, so why would we invade it? It is easy to miss, but consider that if some Cubans invaded the place with some fishing boats we would likely let them have the place. Similarly, we would gladly give up California - particularly if it was partitioned off along one of God's fault lines.

[Johny Joe Hold]

I'm a little worried about talk the President might invade Iran. A war with a country that has an army and air force is not the right choice. It's especially problematic now that Iran's Foreign Minister has pledged to fight back if invaded. Countries that fight back must be taken off the list of candidates.

President Reagan invaded Granada. It took a couple of days with no casualties on either side and did wonders for Reagan's political career. I'd suggest President Trump invade Granada again.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/19/middl...ntl/index.html

[JakubDovac]

The only mistake Pres. Trump makes is still sticking up for the Zionist agenda which is a fatal mistake. We need to pray for him. It also were the Jews who killed Christ.I as a right-Libertarian am fully aware of the Jesuit deceptions. So was Lincoln, and we know how he ended.

"The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. The banking powers are more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. They denounce as public enemies all who question their methods or throw light upon their crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe. [As a most undesirable consequence of the war...] Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow. The money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed." —Abraham Lincoln

"Neo-conservatism has been around for decades and, strangely, has connections to past generations as far back as Machiavelli. Modern-day neo-conservatism was introduced to us in the 1960s. It entails both a detailed strategy as well as a philosophy of government. The ideas of Teddy Roosevelt, and certainly Woodrow Wilson, were quite similar to many of the views of present-day neocons. Neocon spokesman Max Boot brags that what he advocates is “hard Wilsonianism.” In many ways, there’s nothing “neo” about their views, and certainly nothing conservative. Yet they have been able to co-op the conservative movement by advertising themselves as a new or modern form of conservatism.
More recently, the modern-day neocons have come from the far left, a group historically identified as former Trotskyists. Liberal Christopher Hitchins, has recently officially joined the neocons, and it has been reported that he has already been to the White House as an ad hoc consultant. Many neocons now in positions of influence in Washington can trace their status back to Professor Leo Strauss of the University of Chicago. One of Strauss’ books was Thoughts on Machiavelli. This book was not a condemnation of Machiavelli’s philosophy. Paul Wolfowitz actually got his PhD under Strauss. Others closely associated with these views are Richard Perle, Eliot Abrams, Robert Kagan and William Kristol. All are key players in designing our new strategy of preemptive war. Others include: Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute; former CIA Director James Woolsy; Bill Bennett of Book of Virtues fame; Frank Gaffney; Dick Cheney; and Donald Rumsfeld. There are just too many to mention who are philosophically or politically connected to the neocon philosophy in some varying degree.
The godfather of modern-day neo-conservatism is considered to be Irving Kristol, father of Bill Kristol, who set the stage in 1983 with his publication Reflections of a Neoconservative. In this book, Kristol also defends the traditional liberal position on welfare.
More important than the names of people affiliated with neo-conservatism are the views they adhere to. Here is a brief summary of the general understanding of what neocons believe:

1. They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual.
2. They are for redrawing the map of the Middle East and are willing to use force to do so.
3. They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends.
4. They accept the notion that the ends justify the means – that hard-ball politics is a moral necessity.
5. They express no opposition to the welfare state.
6. They are not bashful about an American empire; instead they strongly endorse it.
7. They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive.
8. They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit.
9. They believe pertinent facts about how a society should be run should be held by the elite and
   withheld from those who do not have the courage to deal with it.
10. They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill-advised.
11. They hold Leo Strauss in high esteem.
12. They believe imperialism, if progressive in nature, is appropriate.
13. Using American might to force American ideals on others is acceptable. Force should
    not be limited to the defense of our country.
14. 9-11 resulted from the lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.
15. They dislike and despise libertarians (therefore, the same applies to all strict constitutionalists.)
16. They endorse attacks on civil liberties, such as those found in the Patriot Act, as being necessary.
17. They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party.

Various organizations and publications over the last 30 years have played a significant role in the rise to power of the neoconservatives. It took plenty of money and commitment to produce the intellectual arguments needed to convince the many participants in the movement of its respectability." Ron Paul

[Joanna Lytton-Vasey]

You know, dear, you could save everyone - including yourself - a lot of trouble by just posting a link to the site you plagiarized from.

[Johny Joe Hold]

Originally Posted by Joanna Lytton-Vasey

You know, dear, you could save everyone - including yourself - a lot of trouble by just posting a link to the site you plagiarized from.

I'm trying to remember, didn't I see Dovac's post in some children's magazine?

[JakubDovac]

Originally Posted by Johny Joe Hold

I'm trying to remember, didn't I see Dovac's post in some children's magazine?

Dear Joe, that was my uncle

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

As soon as Jared Kushner's iron grip on the Middle East final solution is loosened, all hell breaks loose with another accidental explosive car crash involving an Iranian nuclear scientist. All the work Jared did just went up in smoke. You could have predicted it with sleepy Joe in charge. Now solve THAT.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ad-near-tehran

Mohsen Fakhrizadeh was ambushed with explosives and machine gun fire in the town of Absard, 70km (44 miles) east of Tehran.
Efforts to resuscitate him in hospital failed. His bodyguard and family members were also wounded.


There was no immediate claim of responsibility, but the Iranian foreign minister Mohammed Javad Zarif said Israel was likely to blame, and an adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, vowed retaliation. “We will strike as thunder at the killers of this oppressed martyr and will make them regret their action,” tweeted Hossein Dehghan.


“In the last days of the political life of their gambling ally, the Zionists seek to intensify and increase the pressure on Iran to wage a full-fledged war. The night is long. We will descend like lightning on the killers of this oppressed martyr.”

P.S. I would avoid flying commercial over Iran for the next few days.

[Mashain44]

Well i dont believe a new war will help trump at all, everytime we started a new war, syria, iraq, etc, it was ulitmetly a great waste of time, life, and money. Most of these wars are still going on and they may never end. We dont need a new war, we should focus on better things, such as keeping our nation christian and straight.

And i know this is a unpopular opinon here, but i support Assad over the rebels. Here me out, Assad has been protecting the christains of syria and some of the oldest churchs since the beging of the syrian civil war from the "rebels" who are pretty much on par with ISIS at this point. Assad protects christains, while the rebel groups America supports wants to destroy christains, and the christain history of syria. BTW the only village that mosty speaks ahmaric is in syria and ahmaric was the language jesus spoke

[Didymus Much]

Originally Posted by Mashain44

...ahmaric was the language jesus spoke

I think you mean Aramaic, not Ahmaric (which is spoken in Ethiopia) and *puts Landover hat on* JESUS SPOKE ENGLISH but no one else did at the time so maybe he spoke some Aramaic to be understood

[WWJDnow]

Originally Posted by Didymus Much

JESUS SPOKE ENGLISH

Indeed He did. Just read the King James Version of the Bible--every sentence Jesus spoke was in English except one. The Bible wouldn't lie to us.