• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

Travis007 said:
wrong.... period and dangerous.. unless you feel like having the UN and Russia in charge.. and freedom destroyed for tyrany...

Your posts are always a treat...
Click to expand...

So you're a NeoCon. Thanks for making that clear.

You do know it's 2012 right? Your ideas about how the world works is more than 30 years old and grossly outdated. In the information age, we know your blathering is just that. How about this, go hide and let the adults handle things for here on out.
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

MaggieD said:
Romney didn't even use the world "battleship." Why are you talking about battleships? ;)
Click to expand...
Because we're counting ships. When we're talking navy ships of real operational significance we're talking about aircraft carriers and battleships. Aircraft carriers are what's important. Under Obama, we're moving from the Nimitz class carrier to the Ford class super-carrier. The net result is a huge increase in operational effectiveness.

We will never fight another large scale war along the lines of WWII. Any conflicts that the US will have against serious powers will be catastrophically nuclear. The primary use case for large deployments of US troops will be peace-keeping and anti-insurgency. The primary offensive systems will be geared towards small scale surgical operations.

What capabilities do we want if we get into a conflict with Iran? Do we want to park many ships on it's coasts as a show of
force? Or do we want to be able to go in, accomplish our mission, and leave without anyone knowing we were even there?

Even if you don't like Obama's domestic policies, he's been a tour de' force internationally. We're no longer in constant fear of a terrorist attack. That's no small feat.

Do you really want to trust safety of our country to someone who doesn't even know the geography of the middle east?
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

MaggieD said:
I don't claim to know, Wiggen. I don't know that much about our defense resources. But I do know one thing: the importance of our Navy has little to do with taking on every other Navy in the world and defeating them. That's not how armageddon is going to go down.
Click to expand...

You would prefer a candidate that knows so little about Geography that he doesn't even realize that Iran is not landlocked, nor does it share a border with Syria. The bottom line....Romney is thoroughly unprepared to be Commander in Chief and his foreign policy blunder and blunder after blunder clearly displays this.
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

Wiggen said:
Vice President, Maggie. Vice President. Go back and read Ryan's comments.

And did Obama mention battleships in the debate? I missed it if he did.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to go back and read Ryan's comments. My post responded to a thread about the debate last night. That would be Obama/Romney.
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

Wiggen said:
Maggie - we now spend more money on defense that the next ten nations combined. How much is enough? We simply don't need a 300+ ship Navy any more. As a former Navy man, I can tell you the Navy we have is capable of taking on every other navy in the world and defeating them. Isn't that enough?
Click to expand...

You're wrong. As Adam so kindly posted in the fact check, though we may not need 313, we do need at least 300, and that's more than we have. That's from the current Navy Secretary.

So, on this point, Romney correct, Obama (and you) incorrect.
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

Tettsuo said:
So you're a NeoCon. Thanks for making that clear.

You do know it's 2012 right? Your ideas about how the world works is more than 30 years old and grossly outdated. In the information age, we know your blathering is just that. How about this, go hide and let the adults handle things for here on out.
Click to expand...

comedy....

hwo am I a neocon? explain what you think a neocon is...

I agree let Mitt the ADULT clean up widdle Barrys big mess... obviously that loser scumbag Obama has not a clue..
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

Travis007 said:
comedy....

hwo am I a neocon? explain what you think a neocon is...

I agree let Mitt the ADULT clean up widdle Barrys big mess... obviously that loser scumbag Obama has not a clue..
Click to expand...

Are you a Centrist?
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

disneydude said:
You would prefer a candidate that knows so little about Geography that he doesn't even realize that Iran is not landlocked, nor does it share a border with Syria. The bottom line....Romney is thoroughly unprepared to be Commander in Chief and his foreign policy blunder and blunder after blunder clearly displays this.
Click to expand...
On the list of countries not to confuse with the former Soviet republic of Georgia, Russia is probably high up.

But President Obama committed the flub on Monday while seated next to Georgia's president, Mikheil Saakashvili. Obama quickly corrected himself, avoiding what could have perhaps been a more serious diplomatic blunder.

The president slipped while discussing Georgia's 20th anniversary of independence -- from Soviet Russia.
Obama mistakenly refers to Georgia as 'Russia' in meeting with Georgian president | Fox News
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

In your opinion I'm wrong. In my opinion, I'm right.

The Secretary of the Navy wants more ships? Shocking!

But let's assume Romney wins and we get our 313 ship navy. Will you be heading down to the recruiting office to help man one of those ships?

PS In spite of Paul Ryan, I'm kinda doubting any of those new ships will be 'the modern battleship' he longs for.
 
Last edited:
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

clownboy said:
You're wrong. As Adam so kindly posted in the fact check, though we may not need 313, we do need at least 300, and that's more than we have. That's from the current Navy Secretary.

So, on this point, Romney correct, Obama (and you) incorrect.
Click to expand...
That's a pointless number. If the number of ships meant anything at all, we could just buy a few canoes, stencil some numbers on it and then we could have THOUSANDS of ships.

The point Obama was making, and the point everyone here has been talking about, is that the number is meaningless; operational effectiveness is the key.

The numbers that are important are how many carrier strike groups do we have? (11). How many aircraft can they support? What kind of range do they have? What's the maximum time to target?

Throwing out a number and saying we need more without specifying WHAT we need more of is catastrophically naive.
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

MaggieD said:
I'm not going to go back and read Ryan's comments. My post responded to a thread about the debate last night. That would be Obama/Romney.
Click to expand...

and my comment was in response to Ryan's defense of Romney's ignorance in the debate last night. There are NO BATTLESHIPS left on active service anywhere in the world except the USS ARIZONA. And it has been at the bottom of Pearl Harbor since December 7, 1941.
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

The NWO tells the Republicans what to say, do and think. I am not a conspiracy person, but if I was, I'd say Republicans are it!!! They have ijits like Bush, Cheney, Romney and Ryan who just mouth words they are told to say.

That's why they are such morons and why they resonate with almost half of voters.
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

Travis007 said:
comedy....

hwo am I a neocon? explain what you think a neocon is...

I agree let Mitt the ADULT clean up widdle Barrys big mess... obviously that loser scumbag Obama has not a clue..
Click to expand...
More childish insults. What's the point?

Something tells me (that something being your posts) all you're going to do is continue spewing nonsense and insults but making no valid points. So it's kinda boring responding to you.

Neocon - Conservatives that just love to stick their noses in the business of other sovereign countries under the illusion of benefitting American interests.
The fact is they only care about benefitting the industrial military complex and padding the pockets of their rich buddies. Russian is a smoke screen. It's an attempt keep people afraid.

So either you've bought into the lies, or you're a sockpuppet. I don't care which, mostly because I find you extremely boring to read. You often have nothing to say except spewed, canned talking points and insults.
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

Uzidoesit said:
The NWO tells the Republicans what to say, do and think. I am not a conspiracy person, but if I was, I'd say Republicans are it!!! They have ijits like Bush, Cheney, Romney and Ryan who just mouth words they are told to say.

That's why they are such morons and why they resonate with almost half of voters.
Click to expand...

so ripe with hypocrisy...
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

Tettsuo said:
More childish insults. What's the point?

Something tells me (that something being your posts) all you're going to do is continue spewing nonsense and insults but making no valid points. So it's kinda boring responding to you.

Neocon - Conservatives that just love to stick their noses in the business of other sovereign countries under the illusion of benefitting American interests.
The fact is they only care about benefitting the industrial military complex and padding the pockets of their rich buddies. Russian is a smoke screen. It's an attempt keep people afraid.

So either you've bought into the lies, or you're a sockpuppet. I don't care which, mostly because I find you extremely boring to read. You often have nothing to say except spewed, canned talking points and insults.
Click to expand...

awwwww.....your posts are so amazing... its like having a snotty High School kid try to make a point... I can tell that you have zero to offer.. your just are an Obama parrot

put me on ignore... I would love that..

Thanks for showing you dont even know what a Neocon is....
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

So - to the bigger issue being grazed:

Is our military/navy (etc) - sufficiently manned, stocked and provided for?

I say no - we lack where it's needed the most because we're spread too thin and excessive monies are dumped where it's most useless.

So - everyone can get hung up in what the candidates say . . . or in reality that will outlast the presidency.
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

Travis007 said:
On the list of countries not to confuse with the former Soviet republic of Georgia, Russia is probably high up.

But President Obama committed the flub on Monday while seated next to Georgia's president, Mikheil Saakashvili. Obama quickly corrected himself, avoiding what could have perhaps been a more serious diplomatic blunder.

The president slipped while discussing Georgia's 20th anniversary of independence -- from Soviet Russia.
Obama mistakenly refers to Georgia as 'Russia' in meeting with Georgian president | Fox News
Click to expand...

You must be part of Mitt Romney's ilk that believe that Russia is the greatest threat to U.S. Security.
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

disneydude said:
You must be part of Mitt Romney's ilk that believe that Russia is the greatest threat to U.S. Security.
Click to expand...

yes, we need to evolve.

Our standing president is our greatest threat.
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

Tettsuo said:
Neocon - Conservatives that just love to stick their noses in the business of other sovereign countries under the illusion of benefitting American interests.
Click to expand...

You know you can say that about many other political tendencies, right?
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

disneydude said:
You must be part of Mitt Romney's ilk that believe that Russia is the greatest threat to U.S. Security.
Click to expand...

They are a large concern.
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

Wiggen said:
Maggie - we now spend more money on defense that the next ten nations combined. How much is enough? We simply don't need a 300+ ship Navy any more. As a former Navy man, I can tell you the Navy we have is capable of taking on every other navy in the world and defeating them. Isn't that enough?
Click to expand...

Actually its more than the next 15 countries combined. It used to be next 18 countries, but china and a few others started spending a bit more.
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

poweRob said:
Last night Obama got a point in about Romney's claims that our navy is weaker because it's amount of ships have decreased since WWI:

'You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916," Obama said. "Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military's changed.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Every soldier is issued a rifle.
Every rifle is issued with a bayonete.
Today's army is larger than that in 1916, and so there are -more- bayonetes today.

The fact that The Obama does not know this will be lost on those that support Him, especially in context.
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

disneydude said:
You must be part of Mitt Romney's ilk that believe that Russia is the greatest threat to U.S. Security.
Click to expand...

You're repeating an Obama lie. For the record:

■Obama wrongly claimed Romney called Russia the “biggest geopolitical threat facing America.” Actually, Romney called Russia a “foe” and not a “threat.” He said “the greatest threat that the world faces is a nuclear Iran.”
Romney, March 26, 2012: [T]his is to Russia, this is, without question, our No. 1 geopolitical foe. …

Blitzer: But you think Russia is a bigger foe right now than, let’s say, Iran or China or North Korea? Is that – is that what you’re suggesting, Governor?

Romney: Well, I’m saying in terms of a geopolitical opponent, the nation that lines up with the world’s worst actors. Of course, the greatest threat that the world faces is a nuclear Iran. A nuclear North Korea is already troubling enough.
FactCheck.org : False Claims in Final Debate
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

Wiggen said:
In your opinion I'm wrong. In my opinion, I'm right.

The Secretary of the Navy wants more ships? Shocking!
Click to expand...

Whoops, you got caught not paying attention. The Secretary of the Navy said they didn't need the 313 ships, they only need 300. So, you're wrong in my opinion AND his.

Wiggen said:
But let's assume Romney wins and we get our 313 ship navy. Will you be heading down to the recruiting office to help man one of those ships?
Click to expand...

I served my piece and am well beyond my expire date. If you have read my posts (some that you've responded to in the past), you'd know that. But again, you're not paying attention. However, perhaps one of my nephews. Two of them just enlisted Navy.
 
re: Ryan "I don't understand" bayonets comment [W:233]

Aunt Spiker said:
yes, we need to evolve.

Our standing president is our greatest threat.
Click to expand...

At least we have a President that actually stands for something. Romney flip flops all over the place on every issue. Seriously, how anyone can take anything the man says with any credibility is nothing short of amazing. He actually endorsed everything Obama has done last night.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom