Lysistrata

Putin critic gunned down right in front of the Kremlin. OMG who would have done such a thing?

and I have missed you as well Mr. Montosh. I have not seen you in a while except small bits on OWF. Live long, and prosper.

^^^"The Wrath of Khan"... bar none my favorite.^^^

Leonard Nimoy has died at 83. Sad day. I grew up with Star Trek. From the original series, the movies, and all the spin-offs. It was a huge part of my life. He will be missed.

"Additionally, even if there was someone with better ground forces. I wish you luck with getting onto US mainland." This made me laugh. If they managed to get onto the U.S. mainland... they would need buckets to catch the lead.

This is crime against the entire human race. Destroying the history of our planet will destroy our future generations ability to learn from our past. The Earth entire should mobilize against these people... Now. No mercy.

I'm glad I posted something in here that didn't make you want to light my head on fire

Iraq has not had a real army since we destroyed it. The "new" army were men that needed a job. They took the money and when ISIS attacked, they dropped their weapons and ran away. Nation building at it's finest.

I played XI for a while and was planning to play XIV... but the game was largely hated when released, so I didn't take the dive. The one thing I didn't like about XI was I absolutely had to play it with a game pad. Not very mouse friendly. Can you tell me why I should play XIV now?

All the tyrants, dictators and apartheid of the world absolutely love that definition. You're intelligent enough to know exactly why. All revolutions would then also be classified as terror movements if that was the case, including your own independence revolution and pretty much a huge chunk of history would then be full of terror. There's so much wrong with that definition. Your invasion of war is also then classified as a terror invasion if we go by that definition, so does your countless interventions in various countries around the globe. Do you see why this definition is wrong? I agree with you, first degree murder is murder and should be punished equally. I also say terror is terror, every murder is a bloody terror attack, simple as that. Good point. I'm sure the Boston Tea Party was considered an act of terrorism by the English, and I'm sure the Boston Massacre was considered an act of oppression by the Colonists. It all led to acts of war, and there was one. Dealing with Islamic terrorism is something everyone has been dancing around for a long time. There is no organized government willing to openly sanction Islamic terrorists. Here is where the problem starts. How do you declare war on a portion of a religion? Others will say that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Okay that's cool, but if you're going to call them freedom fighters then you are supporting their actions and should be treated as such. The U.S. can, and should, destroy ISIS. Just go in and wipe them out. Then leave. I also would not be playing around with Iran. That mess should have been resolved when Saddam Hussein was taken down.

I don't understand what anyone means by "hate crime". The guy shot 3 people dead. He should be charged with 3 counts of first degree murder. The prosecution will then present the motive, and the defense will state their case. Are you telling me that if a video comes out that shows that the dude said "I love you" before he shot them he should then get a lighter sentence? You punish the crime, not the emotion. It's so stupid to go down that road. I don't want to judge this guy before his day in court, but if he can't prove he was in fear for his life, he's toast. I think he shot them because he utterly hated their presence in his country. Plain and simple.

I don't buy into the hate crime campaign. Nobody murders anyone without hate, and the punishment for murder should be the same no matter what. This man murdered 3 human beings, and should be put to death as far as I'm concerned. You can't hang the dude twice because he hated muslims. This is not an act of terrorism. Terrorism is killing, or destroying property, for the purpose of changing government policy or making a political statement. This was straight up murder because the guy hated muslims. The way things are in the world today, I'm surprised it is not happening every day. I fear that because we have a President that refuses to stand up for the people he was elected to protect, the people will do whatever they feel they must do to protect themselves. This is awful, but I'm not shocked that it happened.

Oh sorry James... it's a comment on how the USA spreads democracy into countries that don't want it.

Expanding on what Foxy said about us bringing in democracy... Somewhere someone thought that all we need to do is give them money, McDonalds, Starbucks, General Motors, and Apple and everyone will just fall in line. Then they buy bombs, eat burgers, drink our coffee, mount machine guns on the trucks, and detonate the roadside bombs with iPhones... what could possibly go wrong?

Fixed that for ya.

Good thing they didn't hand her over to the US... Obama would have let her go.

Robert my friend... the UN is a mob of international lobbyists on a mission to suck as much wealth out of the USA as possible. They are self-serving parasites, thumping their chests and acting like they matter. They will do nothing about this because there is no money to embezzel and nothing to smuggle. Worthless.

That is honestly the most vicious death I have ever seen. Only one way to deal with these monsters... extermination. We have the means, we just need the leader.

Just so you guys know that I was not talking smack about Hillary... it just hit the headline of the Drudge Report http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/2/hillary-clinton-libya-tapes-set-house-benghazi-com/ "The chairman of a special House committee created to investigate the 2012 Benghazi tragedy on Monday instructed his staff to review secretly recorded tapes and intelligence reports that detail Hillary Rodham Clinton’s role in advocating and executing the war in Libya, opening the door for a possible expansion of his probe. Rep. Trey Gowdy’s decision to seek a review of the materials, first highlighted in a series of Washington Times stories last week, carries consequences for the 2016 election in which Mrs.Clinton is expected to seek the presidency. It could also move the committee to examine the strained relationship between the State Department and Pentagon, which sharply disagreed over the 2011 war in Libya and the response to the terrorist attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi a year later. The Times reported last week that U.S. intelligence did not support Mrs. Clinton’s story of an impending genocide in Libya that she used to sell the war against Moammar Gadhafi’s regime. The newspaper also unveiled secretly recorded tapes from Libya that showed that the Pentagon and Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich so distrusted her stewardship of the war that they opened their own diplomatic channels with the Gadhafi regime. The tapes included candid conversations and allegations that Mrs. Clinton took the U.S. to war on false pretenses and was not listening to the advice of military commanders or career intelligence officers."

What would you base your conclusion on? You would have to assume that the American voters will repeat what they did in 2008 and elect Hillary based on a desire to make history. She has never accomplished a thing. She was suppose to be the shoe-in for the Dem nomination in '08 along with Rudy Giuliani for the GOP, and we all saw what happened. She is trying to delay announcing until July and pressure Trey Gowdy to hold Benghazi hearings before the stonewalling State Dept. is forced to release all the documents... and secret tapes of Dennis Kucinich and the Libyan Government have just come out with her pressing for war in Libya under false pretenses. Sound familiar? She may end up not running at all.

I think it's time to start a new thread... I'm too involved with American politics and I don't really understand British political parties. I assume there are vast differences in platforms. That being said, Jeb Bush is not my first choice... niether was Mitt Romney. The problem lies in the reality. The candidate that commands the support of the donors will always have the advantage. Sure Scott Walker can make a case, but it will take much more than his popularity with the conservative base to pull big money into his camp. He kind of has the personality of a parking meter and that will affect his campaign. He will have to inspire independents to support him and that will be very tough for him. You talk about the hatred the left has for George W. as the reason Jeb can't win, but you skip the issue of the hatred the right has for Hillary Clinton. Jeb was a very popular Governor of Florida and has not been involved in politics for 15 years. He does not have the Texas accent George has, and speaks fluent Spanish... his wife is Hispanic and he's very popular with Hispanic voters. Jeb is not George and the only kink he has is his last name and we will see if he can overcome that. I believe the Clinton name poses the same, and it will be a wash. He will be hammered on school choice and immigration... but Romney was hammered about Romneycare and still got the nomination. Jeb knows his path to win is in the Hispanic vote, just like his brother. Hillary has bigger problems. She's up to her ears with everything that Obama has done. The anti-war left hates her for Iraq and Libya. The enviornmentalists will hate her for her coming position on the Keystone XL (she won't go against the unions), the progressives will have a problem with her because she's rich and a Wall Street junkie, and the black community will not come out for her like they did for Obama. The USA hates a coronation, and it's all Hillary. Being a woman is not a qualification... it's a coin toss of birth.

I'm too involved with American politics and I don't really understand British political parties. I assume their are vast differences in platforms. That being said, Jeb Bush is not my first choice... niether was Mitt Romney. The problem lies in the reality. The candidate that commands the support of the donors will always have the advantage. Sure Scott Walker can make a case, but it will take much more than his popularity with the conservative base to pull big money into his camp. He kind of has the personality of a parking meter and that will affect his campaign. He will have to inspire independents to support him and that will be very tough for him. You talk about the hatred the left has for George W. as the reason Jeb can't win, but you skip the issue of the hatred the right has for Hillary Clinton. Jeb was a very popular Governor of Florida and has not been involved in politics for 15 years. He does not have the Texas accent George has, and speaks fluent Spanish... his wife is Hispanic and he's very popular with Hispanic voters. Jeb is not George and the only kink he has is his last name and we will see if he can overcome that. I believe the Clinton name poses the same, and it will be a wash. He will be hammered on school choice and immigration... but Romney was hammered about Romneycare and still got the nomination. Jeb knows his path to win is in the Hispanic vote, just like his brother. Hillary has bigger problems. She's up to her ears with everything that Obama has done. The anti-war left hates her for Iraq and Libya. The enviornmentalists will hate her for her coming position on the Keystone XL (she won't go against the unions), the progressives will have a problem with her because she's rich and a Wall Street junkie, and the black community will not come out for her like they did for Obama. The USA hates a coronation, and it's all Hillary. Being a woman is not a qualification... it's a coin toss of birth.

Mitt Romney will not be running for President in 2016. This makes Jeb Bush ahead by a mile. Too bad.

ok if anyone has really done there research about WW2 they would know that the only reason hitler didnt take the soviet union out is because he made a really dumb move and that was to decide "i want the city that bears stalins name" if he had done what he should have done which was continue on to moscow the soviet union would have been finished. The russians are still a force to be reckoned with but dont give them "that" much credit. The United States lost about 500,000 in WW2. The Soviet Union lost about 20,000,000 lives. Stalin would have beat Germany regardless by cutting off supply and shear numbers. The nuclear power of China is not what makes them powerful, it's the population. Hitler lost because he failed to defeat England, therefore the United States had a base of operation to create a second front and poor little Adolf could not hold that off. The U.S. was way too late and should have come to help my English cousins much sooner. So sorry for that my British friends. Winston Churchill is on my list of great heroes.

Is the hypocrisy real? Americans are the ones who for most fear and mistrust the government as a core of their existence, but in this case you have to trust that this man, who has unveiled some of the country's most deepest secrets, will get a fair trail or even shielding from prosecution? If this man was to stay in the US, he'd been haunted, caught and set in Alcatraz/Guantanamo Bay for his 'crimes'. People are so upset about what Snowden has done 'to his country', yet aren't even close to judge what their government has done all these years, all under the umbrella of 'the war against terror'. Because Merkel, every American citizen and every other citizen outside of the US is a potential threat, right? I can only give you my opinion from a right of center, conservative American citizen. Snowden had the choice of being an American hero or becoming an American traitor. He chose to be a traitor when he ran away and left the NSA with the ability to clean up the mess and sieze the high ground. Yes, we mistrust our government... and that is why we elect new blood into the government on a regular basis. Snowden revealed that the NSA is spying on everyone with every tool possible. Where is the news there? I already knew that. Alcatraz is an empty island in the San Francisco bay and Guantanamo will be given back to Cuba within the next two years if Obama gets his way. Every human being on this planet that does not obey Sunni extremist muslim policy is at war with terror, and ignoring and denying that is not the way to defeat it.