Hillary say's wha...

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Here's one that will have your toe tapping, in anticipation...

[video=youtube_share;rfU3hI8ML30]http://youtu.be/rfU3hI8ML30[/video]

 

[firehawk1]

Here's one that will have your toe tapping, in anticipation...

[video=youtube_share;rfU3hI8ML30]http://youtu.be/rfU3hI8ML30[/video]

Good God after just 1:33 I started laughing uncontrollably. What a brain dead useful idiot, another reason celebrities should just stick to entertaining us. They live in a make believe world and are too stupid to realize it.

 

[rambone]

My main point in posting this was, it is remarkable that someone possibly running for President would voice the opinion that we need to empathize with an enemy. It's just touchy/feel good crap. Wishing things were the way we WANT them to be does not change reality.

The reasons these 'wars' have gone on as long as they have and appear endless is because we have lost our willingness to destroy an enemy. We don't even seem willing to force them to a unconditional surrender so these 'wars' go on and on. All because we want to appear nice and understanding. That is just '60's flower child/hippie talk, you know make love not war drivel...

Hillary has a record, and she obviously supports war. She's only pandering here. The bombs will keep dropping if she is in power, you better believe it.

Wars drag on intentionally, because the people who run this country want them to drag on. Not because they are hippie idealists.

Hillary's objective is world government, not American peace and prosperity. When you analyze her actions keep that in mind.

BTW I have to ask, what is your take on siding with Stalin during WWll?

I look on it negatively. Stalin murdered more civilians than Hitler (already before WW2). Tweak a few events, and the USA might have rushed to ally with Hitler to defeat Stalin.

 

[firehawk1]

Hillary has a record, and she obviously supports war. She's only pandering here. The bombs will keep dropping if she is in power, you better believe it.

I don't know if I can agree with your take on this. The left knows that to finance their social agenda they need money, and they know where to get it, gut the military. If she was to 'go to war' it would be her dragged kicking and screaming because of public opinion, same as Bill.

Wars drag on intentionally, because the people who run this country want them to drag on. Not because they are hippie idealists.

I disagree, governments far more oppressive that ours have fallen because the citizens were tired of war. Example, the Italians finally had enough... The hippie comment was just an example of why the Clintons and their ilk are dinosaurs, lost in the 60's. Their view of the world is stuck in the '60's and has not changed, but the world has.

Hillary's objective is world government, not American peace and prosperity. When you analyze her actions keep that in mind.

I agree totally other than to them it is Clinton Government.



I look on it negatively. Stalin murdered more civilians than Hitler (already before WW2). Tweak a few events, and the USA might have allied with Hitler to defeat Stalin.

So, your take on siding with Hitler IF the USSR had declared war on the United States and planned on attacking us from the Pacific?

Is there a time that allying with someone during a war who doesn't quite meet up with your countries standards ever acceptable?

 

[jwh20]

Hillary say's what... she's most likely running for POTUS? Wonder what caliber hole she has in her foot?

Clinton says America should ?empathize? with its enemies | Fox News

It not the hole in her foot that concerns me. It's the gaping hole in her HEAD! You know, the one where they sucked her brains out and replaced it with mashed potatoes.

 

[actaeon277]

Here's one that will have your toe tapping, in anticipation...

[video=youtube_share;rfU3hI8ML30]http://youtu.be/rfU3hI8ML30[/video]

I just vomited.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I just vomited.

I just laugh.

 

[Leadeye]

Makes sense to understand how your enemy thinks even their art, it makes it easier to beat them.

 

[1911ly]

She is appealing to the Hippy peace loving types. Which would appear to Me most of the democratic party at this point. I think She should stick with that policy. I think it will be her downfall. I think the democrat party (like the republican party) is ready for a change. We saw the unhappiness from the American voter in the last election. Obama's foreign policy has made us a look weak. Hell, we are weak. Putin is the new bad ass. He wipes his feet on Obama. American's (I think) can see that now. We'll hopefully see a change.

 

[bwframe]

It doesn't matter what she's done. It doesn't matter what she does. I don't think we can beat her.
She'll have all the libs, the entitlement crowd and EVERY breathing woman under 35. I think the numbers already have us beat before we even find a candidate.

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

She stole the video title from our Rep. Waslorski, Stand with Jackie!

 

[rambone]

I don't know if I can agree with your take on this. The left knows that to finance their social agenda they need money, and they know where to get it, gut the military. If she was to 'go to war' it would be her dragged kicking and screaming because of public opinion, same as Bill.

The Clintons bear some or all responsibility for American wars in Yugoslavia, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. The idea that they hate war is a complete myth.

So, your take on siding with Hitler IF the USSR had declared war on the United States and planned on attacking us from the Pacific?

I can confidently say there will never be a Rambone-Hitler alliance.

What about you? Would you have an alliance with Hitler?

Is there a time that allying with someone during a war who doesn't quite meet up with your countries standards ever acceptable?

I'm not convinced we should have entangling alliances, even if they support human rights.

 

[88GT]

I'm not convinced we should have entangling alliances, even if they support human rights.

Ah, the old "entangling alliances" line. Looks really good on paper, but doesn't quite cut the mustard in the real world.

 

[rambone]

Ah, the old "entangling alliances" line. Looks really good on paper, but doesn't quite cut the mustard in the real world.

I understand why some people feel that way.

 

[firehawk1]

The Clintons bear some or all responsibility for American wars in Yugoslavia, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. The idea that they hate war is a complete myth.

I contend Bill went to 'war' simply because of public opinion NOT because he wanted to, IMO it would be the same for Hillary. These two run their lives by polls as they have no real core beliefs.



I can confidently say there will never be a Rambone-Hitler alliance.

What about you? Would you have an alliance with Hitler?

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend". If I was in the position of having to chose to an alliance with Hitler, yes I would do so if it were to my advantage in my attempt to save the country from an invasion. I would choose to be a little more pragmatic in a situation like this instead of an ideologue. As the leader of my country (within reason) it's survival would be my TOP priority as it should be. Kind of hard to 'preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of The United States' if the country has been overrun by an invading military.



I'm not convinced we should have entangling alliances, even if they support human rights.

The world is a far different place now that it was in 1776. So you feel there nothing worth fighting for BEFORE an enemy lands on U.S. soil?

There people, two differing opinions and ZERO name calling.

 

[88GT]

I understand why some people feel that way.

Probably because it's true.

 

[Leadeye]

I'm still betting that if she runs her campaign self destructs before the primaries go very far, just like the last time. She's just a phony political celebrity diva, better suited to talk shows.

 

[firehawk1]

I'm still betting that if she runs her campaign self destructs before the primaries go very far, just like the last time. She's just a phony political celebrity diva, better suited to talk shows.

If she opens her piehole and spews much more of this kind of drivel, yes you are probably correct.

 

[rambone]

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend". If I was in the position of having to chose to an alliance with Hitler, yes I would do so if it were to my advantage in my attempt to save the country from an invasion. I would choose to be a little more pragmatic in a situation like this instead of an ideologue. As the leader of my country (within reason) it's survival would be my TOP priority as it should be. Kind of hard to 'preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of The United States' if the country has been overrun by an invading military.

OK, fair enough. A case could be made either way.

But here's the fun part. What's worse, joining forces with the Nazis or exhibiting human empathy when making decisions?

 

[firehawk1]

But here's the fun part. What's worse, joining forces with the Nazis or exhibiting human empathy when making decisions?

I'm not following you here... Are you referring to aligning with Hitler to help save the country from being invaded while knowing the SS was slaughtering Jews?