waldo

Just four or five more years. LOL

Kane will not work In Buffalo . This city is not big enough for him anymore. Like most kids today he is a bit of a narcissist. He does not have the patience to wait 5-7 more years to become a cup threat. Its a world of instant gratification or nothing for them. Not a good tradeIMO. (and I have never been a Myers fan)

11th in ecac in ga and save percentage?

Japan and Germany were in expansion mode (for different reasons) , fdr recognized it but he had party problems in the house and senate and probably on the wife side. If he made a mistake it was not in opposing his partys isolationist mood in both houses earlier to counter German and Japanese advances. He could have driven anything he wanted through the legislature at that time but he waited and focused on domestic policy.His first foreign policy team was dove like and not as proffessional as it should have been. It is understandable why he focused on the economy but some could argue the real threat was external and very recognizable ,He was a smart many and changed out his staff and brought in some militarists after the handwritting was on the wall.He moved his first request to increase the defense budget (could have been done as part of his 33-35 job intiatives ) but that was 4-5 years later. I think had he to do it over again he would have armed the chinese to slow the Japanese down and started preparingfor war in 1934. Had his administration not ignored or lost the intellegence on the pearl harbor attack and simply moved the ships into open water the Japanese timeline changes. Very similar to the twin towers snafu. HUH? Given the balls he had in the air , he did a good job of moving us through that period intact . A miracle really.

No matt , you are arguing that...with yourself...lol leftist /doves cause as many wars as the rightest/hawks and maybe more. Do you get that? lol

Appeasment and islolationist foreign policy tendancies. ..Japan was in expansion mode, like the U.S they were in a recession more to follow , meeting at 2:00

A million things, starting with theJapanese intellegience issue effectively .. and a million others. I assue you have read a number of books relating to this time frame. How have historians treated the issue of FDRs foreign policy team ?

it was a typ0.. read the previous post. The war ended the great recession. wars can do that. Just like the middle eastern military actions helped pull us out of the towers economic collapse. spending... FDR had 1933 to 1938 to recognize what was happening foreign policy wise. He did not . America was not prepared to go to war. He had no choices when he got there.

Mistake .. wanted to type 1933 .good catch.. thanks have no idea where 1928 was coming from

Ummmm 400,000 dead Americans, 60 million dead world wide. Let me think. I probably would have liked FDR to realize what Hiltler was in 1928-34 and to deal with him then. I would have liked FDR to have appointed more competant State Department and Foreign policy officials so that he would have had better choices than listening to Nazi lovers like Kennedy or to the Hulls of his adminstration. I would have liked it if he was more forceful with that idiot Chamberlain and if he was not a socialist/communist. But then again I was not born yet and hindsight is 20/20 He had not choice when he got there, He painted himself in.

They were not democrats? They did not have the power to go or not go? For the record and so that you do not drag us too far a field. Here is my intial statement . J"oe. Which party do you think the following Presidents belonged to? FYI(these were all real wars) WWl Woodrow Wilson WWll FDR and Where is my hat Truman First Nuclear strikes in History.200,000 men, women and children dead ..Truman Korean War I think I found my Hat Truman Vietnam War John Kennedy, the great liberal icon, and Great Society Lyndon Johnson You can pin the Civil War on the Republican Lincoln If you wish or you could choose to blame it on those dirty Southern Democrats for trying to destroy the UNION The Revolunionary War? that would be debateable party affiliation wise. Those guys were definately not liberals" generals and admirals..actually

Why do you guys keep trying to drag me into a different discussion? It does not change the validity of my intial statement? You could argue the same for BUSH.. I would not but you can if you wish. They were both faced with overwhelming polls and bi partisan congressional support for War. On the FDR side there was an added incentive , he was looking for a way out of the great depression that his parties policies had kept the country in for a decade. Wars are a great Keynesian way to exit a recession. An interesting similarity. FDR lost (new proof that he purposely ignored it) critical intellegence that probably could have avoided the strike. Bushes CIA/FBI had the intellegence but never put it together.

That statement has someting to do with the relevances of my intial statement that it was democrat presidents who committed to sending american troops into every major war of the modern era?

Oh ..You mean it was not those Democrat Presidents that sent our troops into those wars. ? Is that your Point? LOL If you want to discuss the actual causes of those conflicts and the foreign policy mistakes made by the presidents who committed us we can go there but that was not my point. The point I made was in response to a statement made by an uniformed poster that it was the republicans historically who were the "War Mongers" . I was trying to help the poor guy. lol That statment "republicans are war mongers" is one of the many white houses talking points handed out to the 38% of their coalition which is stupid, so that they can repeat it over and over like a mantra and hopefully infect other stupid people. FYI I could have made the point that there was some irony in the fact that the WW1, WW2 and Vietnam War Presidents were all socialists who went off to war to fight , facists/socialists and communists.. ( I am not sure what to call the Kaiser's affiliation ) But I digress, lol I hope our current socialist president does not join the aformentioned group in the major modern era war catagory, I still think his body count, in the end , will far exceed the 5000 +/- killed in combat in Afgan and Iraq.

, 10000 Political spin. Which party was in control of the Senate in 1979-80. Read the CIA intellegence reports from that era. They became available in the late 1990s. At the time of the "The Deal" the Cia still had hundreds of informants in Iran and the Shah additional 1000's. The Iranian mullahs needed time to consolidate power, and the election of a conservative in the U.S. was an unknown to them.The hostages had served their purpose. Thus..the deal. I will give him credit for the Peace agreement and for being a good man with a kind heart . LOL

laughable! the Irainians will negotiate with you for years on just about anything ( ask the Obama Administration) They have been at it for five+ . The Huffinton Post? LOL .I read just about every news source on the internet and the truth is always illusive and a complilation of facts from several . The Huffington Post and the American Nazi Newsletter are two of hundreds that do not fall into the believable catagory. My god man. Switch to The Smirking Chimp or the Socialist Workers News on their .Org site. Atleast they are not pretentious enough to label their content as factual or news like the Huffinton Puffington Post. lol

NO.. I am arguing that it was the democrats who started every major war in the modern era to counter the previous comments accusing the republlicans of being war mongers. I can give you a much better list if you want to attack repubnlicans. Do not worry joe i will keep you on message.lol It was not Reagan whose policies collapsed the Russian economy and Carter who gave a huge oil revenue stream and a country to radical Islam for the first time in modern history. Reagan was not able to negotiate that massive reduction in nuclear warheads with the Russians? It was not Reagan who forced the Russians out of Afgan? It was not the Iranians who used that money stream to advance terror all over the world over the next five decades? That was not Carter who refused to support americas dictator the shah and as a result turned over some of the largest uranium deposits in the world to the mullahas along with the oil. It was not Jimmy Boy who cut the crap out of the covert side of the CIA because we were not going to get involved in the dirty side of human intelligence anymore? (fyi ..the cia that still has not recovered on the human intelligence side. They lost most of their best senior covert officers in those cuts ) Do you remember carters Human Rights intiative? ( I will not go there) Granted he had some foreign policy success and in comparison to our current presidents foreign policy i will concede he looks like a genius. ( he was probably one of our smartest presidents and a good man)

And the reason the the Iranians all of a sudden were so willing to cut that deal after months of stalling ? Could it be Reagans very public threat during the campaign? Or thier hatred of Carter It is true as others have mentioned , the arab community despises weakness. Ironically, they, more often than not, are the first to cave strength. Now..flash forward ...to today in the middle east.

You mean individuals and groups who fought for social change and equality like the ones Stalin ,and Mao , the ultimate liberals, belonged to ? Or maybe the anti constitution , hate speech filled, envy driven , race baiting, American version, fighting to create social change and equality. LOL I am sure if you brought back Madison, Hamilton , Jefferson, Adams, Washington , etc...They would all line right up and join the American version of the Liberal Party. LOL I do not know what conservatives want but I am happy that you do. Who would guess that you would revert to a ad hominem ..lol ..Maybe I should just do a better job of arguing your side of the discussion?

Tough to deal with facts, huh Swamp ? Which one do you want to challange? :o

Joe. Which party do you think the following Presidents belonged to? FYI(these were all real wars) WWl Woodrow Wilson WWll FDR and Where is my hat Truman First Nuclear strikes in History.200,000 men, women and children dead ..Truman Korean War I think I found my Hat Truman Vietnam War John Kennedy, the great liberal icon, and Great Society Lyndon Johnson You can pin the Civil War on the Republican Lincoln If you wish or you could choose to blame it on those dirty Southern Democrats for trying to destroy the UNION The Revolunionary War? that would be debateable party affiliation wise. Those guys were definately not liberals For the record .He was our buisness and our Dictator. The CIA helped install him in 1979-80. He did his job well until he lost his mind and yes the country was a little bloody, but stable during his tennure. That was our money flowing in during the Iraq / Iranian War and his gas killing the Iranians. (Reagan getting even) And the aformentioned is relevant to this conversation because? He is also the "Father of Radical Islamic Terrorismn" ?

WOW ! great anaolgy..LOL ..Just a little reach there Robot? . A ww2 nuclear strike vs Iraq War II? I can see how a rational person would compare those two. 4400+/- American casulties , of which approx 3000 + were combat deaths, in the Iraq war vs a nuclear exchange that ended a war in which 60 million died of which 400,000 were American / That makes Iraq not much of a war on American Standards huh! Some proffessional soldiers , not me,would call Iraq more of a police action .. Last time I looked, with a minimal American military presence in Iraq in 2008, the country was relatively stable and "the door had not been swung open to insurgents" All of your blustering and phony thin air facts will not change that fact. You guys just love to make up your own revisionist historical facts. Bush, who I did not admire, was the lesser of two unqualified canidates, and left a relatively stable world after having to deal with the Towers, two war fronts and a major recession that crippled the country (note: 80% of the democrats presently in office voted for the Iraq war and the approval polls for war were over 80% ).

This President wining two times in a row is proof positive that critical mass has been reached. Much like our beloved city,there are more people in the country working for and recieving benifits from government than are working in the private sector. We are lazier, fatter , less educated and more reliant on the government teet than ever before. The game is over. LOL..... It was nice while it lasted. 230 + years was not a bad run.

Exactly.. You hit the nail on the head. Perfect ! Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice.... lol He carried NYS in the last election with 60+ percent of the vote. What does that tell you about our neighbors? lol. Carter was the father of Islamic terrorismn. He gave the radical Mullahs control of a country as a base of operations and a vast revenue stream for the first time. Obama is giving them nuclear weapons and more countries. Does that make him the Mommy? :blink:

Not biased.. more amused at the level of incompetence. Nightly news, when reporting on the White House, is like watching Saturday Night LIve. I never thought I would see a President like Carter again in my lifetime. Wonders to behold!