Snarky Sack wrote on Oct 22
nd, 2018 at 8:15pm:
That started right after we got through helping the Soviets contain the Nazis at the cost of hundreds of thousands of American lives (and Hitler never even promised to bury us).
That war was right after we got through helping the French contain whatever system the Germans had during WWII at the cost more than a hundred thousand American lives.
Our nuclear arms race with the Soviets damn near cost us millions of American lives, maybe all of them.
Now, it's who again? The Caliphaters we have to protect the world from?
Either U.S. leaders are incredibly slow learners or else they profit enough from feeding the war machine that the fact that they are at as much risk if not more than every other American doesn't deter them.
Either way, it's not much of an argument for continuing to empower them to steal as much as they "need" to keep it up.
Yes, the MIC has been a real problem since WWII.
I always thought we should have let the Nazis and the Soviets beat each other to death... Had we not provided aid to the Soviets, (Or Britain and France and others
http://www.worldwar2history.info/war/Allies.html) something different would have happened.
Things that almost happened in the past are things that didn't happen, but the Soviets did place deliverable nuclear weapons in Cuba.
My take on radical Islamists is that they are communist led, useful idiots.
I'm not going to repeat what my idea of an adequate defense for America would be these days, but it's actually the entitlement programs, particularly Social Security and Medicare, that will bankrupt us...
Every government in the world seems to be either gearing up for war or in the first stages of bankruptcy, or both.
Speaking of things that might happen, if the Democratic Socialists seize power in America and institute martial law as they've said is their plan, would it be better to have our soldiers here or overseas?
Pages: 
Stark Messages from the Khashoggi Case (Read 205 times)