First assassination attempt against Obama?

[1480]

Originally Posted by August

So we can agree then that Vietnam was a Democrat boondoggle that cost the lives of 10 times as many Americans as the GoP war in Iraq?

August, part of being a liberal, democrat, or wife, is never admiting to being wrong. So, the democratic party would like to put the whole blame on France!

[STEED]

It was the KKK according to the radio phone in.........

[August]

Originally Posted by STEED

It was the KKK according to the radio phone in.........

Apparently these elite klan assassins were so high on meth that the cops spotted their van weaving back and forth across the roadway which is how they were picked up. Hardly a serious threat here folks.

[STEED]

Originally Posted by August

Apparently these elite klan assassins were so high on meth that the cops spotted their van weaving back and forth across the roadway which is how they were picked up. Hardly a serious threat here folks.

Bloody ex-American women living here I don't know can you trust what they say? Well not this one.

[geetrue]

The one guy driving funny got caught and that led to the others getting nabbed.
One jumped out of a window to run for it and got caught.

He's being held on 2 million dollar bail for some drug charges ????

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by August

So we can agree then that Vietnam was a Democrat boondoggle that cost the lives of 10 times as many Americans as the GoP war in Iraq?

It all depends on when you believe the Viet Nam conflict started.

As a political analyst, I use the year 1954 to designate the start of the conflict.

Not really The US action in Viet Nam started in 1954 with the selection of Ngo Dinh Diem by Colonel Edward Landsdale (and $12 Million in bribe money from the CIA) under order from John Foster Dulles US Secretary of State (1953-1959).

Despite the agreement for democratic elections to be held in 1956, since the CIA estimated that Ho Chi Minh would garner "possibly 80% of the popular vote" something had to be done. John Foster Dulles stated at a State Department meeting in 1955 "I don't believe Diem wants to hold elections, and I believe we should support him in this" (Kinzer, 2006, p. 153).

This decision ensured that North and South Korea would not be united.

The Viet Nam conflict started during President Eisenhower's administration (1953-1961)

Kinzer, S. (2006) Overthrow: America's century of regime change from Hawaii to Iraq. New York: Henry Holt and Company

[August]

Originally Posted by Platapus

It all depends on when you believe the Viet Nam conflict started.

As a political analyst, I use the year 1954 to designate the start of the conflict.

Not really The US action in Viet Nam started in 1954 with the selection of Ngo Dinh Diem by Colonel Edward Landsdale (and $12 Million in bribe money from the CIA) under order from John Foster Dulles US Secretary of State (1953-1959).

Despite the agreement for democratic elections to be held in 1956, since the CIA estimated that Ho Chi Minh would garner "possibly 80% of the popular vote" something had to be done. John Foster Dulles stated at a State Department meeting in 1955 "I don't believe Diem wants to hold elections, and I believe we should support him in this" (Kinzer, 2006, p. 153).

This decision ensured that North and South Korea would not be united.

The Viet Nam conflict started during President Eisenhower's administration (1953-1961)

Kinzer, S. (2006) Overthrow: America's century of regime change from Hawaii to Iraq. New York: Henry Holt and Company

1954 was the year Dien Ben Phu fell. War had already started by then, besides giving money logistic support to one side (while the communists supported the other) is hardly "starting" a war.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by August

besides giving money logistic support to one side (while the communists supported the other) is hardly "starting" a war.

There are different interpretations of this. This is what makes history so fun to study.

[August]

Originally Posted by Platapus

There are different interpretations of this. This is what makes history so fun to study.

True dat.

[August]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7581611.stm

'No evidence' of threat to Obama

Three men arrested on weapons and drugs charges in the US state of Colorado were not involved in a credible plan to kill Barack Obama, officials have said.
US Attorney Troy Eid said investigators had found "insufficient evidence of any kind of plot or threat" among the men.
Mr Eid said the threat instead appeared to have been the product of the "racist rantings" of methamphetamine addicts.



Earlier, one of the suspects said his friends may have wanted to shoot Mr Obama at the Democratic convention.



The Illinois senator is set to be nominated as the party's candidate for the US presidency at the gathering in Denver this week.

'True threat'
Speaking at a news conference in the city, Mr Eid said the three "meth heads" arrested on Sunday had not posed a "true threat" to Mr Obama because they simply would not have been capable.

"The alleged threats, hateful and bigoted though they were, involved a group of… methamphetamine abusers, all of whom were impaired at the time," he said.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by 1480

August, part of being a liberal, democrat, or wife, is never admiting to being wrong. So, the democratic party would like to put the whole blame on France!

That makes the US a one-party-system, since Republicans work by exactly the same philosophy - where is the difference then?

[1480]

Originally Posted by Skybird

That makes the US a one-party-system, since Republicans work by exactly the same philosophy - where is the difference then?

It's called sarcasm SB. The only difference between the two parties is, one will spend a billion dollars to give away life jackets to it's citizens in the desert, the other will spend the same amount on advertising to let them know it's a good idea to use them.

It's all in the approach.

[August]

Originally Posted by 1480

It's called sarcasm SB. The only difference between the two parties is, one will spend a billion dollars to give away life jackets to it's citizens in the desert, the other will spend the same amount on advertising to let them know it's a good idea to use them.

It's all in the approach.

Now you've really confused him...

Originally Posted by August

So we can agree then that Vietnam was a Democrat boondoggle that cost the lives of 10 times as many Americans as the GoP war in Iraq?

Well I call it an American "boondoggle" but that's just me. Democrats and Republicans are just the same thing in somewhat different packages, it's like choosing between the Gambino and the Genovesi - crime families.

But if you're claiming that Nixon was somehow less guilty then Kennedy or Johnson, you're wrong. The bombing campaigns during Nixon's reign caused countless civilian deaths in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos and prolonged the war.

[Happy Times]

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Well I call it an American "boondoggle" but that's just me. Democrats and Republicans are just the same thing in somewhat different packages, it's like choosing between the Gambino and the Genovesi - crime families.

You would really compare them to gansters?
Why dont you tell more how the world should be?
How have you contributed to improve the community, society and the world you live in?