Frazzled wrote:
Nothing says we can't still build a whole lot of stuff.

We have thousands of miles of border that could do with tank maneuvers and live fire exercises, and maybe the occasional Ride of the Valkyrie air assault...

lonestarr777 wrote:
Texas is essentially the big fat slow bully who wears a helmet on the playground. He runs around in circles screaming about running away from school when he doesn't get his way but the minute he falls down and gets a booboo he wants all the damn attention. Meanwhile the rest of the schoolyard just rolls their eyes and lets them get away with it cause its not nice to pick on the handicapped.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

On another note, is there a Trump brand Fallout Shelter hes trying to shill?
This talk of another arms race from him is scary stuff

lonestarr777 wrote:
Texas is essentially the big fat slow bully who wears a helmet on the playground. He runs around in circles screaming about running away from school when he doesn't get his way but the minute he falls down and gets a booboo he wants all the damn attention. Meanwhile the rest of the schoolyard just rolls their eyes and lets them get away with it cause its not nice to pick on the handicapped.

 Frazzled wrote:

lonestarr777 wrote:
Texas is essentially the big fat slow bully who wears a helmet on the playground. He runs around in circles screaming about running away from school when he doesn't get his way but the minute he falls down and gets a booboo he wants all the damn attention. Meanwhile the rest of the schoolyard just rolls their eyes and lets them get away with it cause its not nice to pick on the handicapped.

Reported unless its ok to insult 20mm people for no fething reason.

 Frazzled wrote:

lonestarr777 wrote:
Texas is essentially the big fat slow bully who wears a helmet on the playground. He runs around in circles screaming about running away from school when he doesn't get his way but the minute he falls down and gets a booboo he wants all the damn attention. Meanwhile the rest of the schoolyard just rolls their eyes and lets them get away with it cause its not nice to pick on the handicapped.

Reported unless its ok to insult 20mm people for no fething reason.

 feeder wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

lonestarr777 wrote:
Texas is essentially the big fat slow bully who wears a helmet on the playground. He runs around in circles screaming about running away from school when he doesn't get his way but the minute he falls down and gets a booboo he wants all the damn attention. Meanwhile the rest of the schoolyard just rolls their eyes and lets them get away with it cause its not nice to pick on the handicapped.

Reported unless its ok to insult 20mm people for no fething reason.

20mm people is an awkward scale. Most gamers prefer either 15mm or 28mm.

 Ustrello wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

lonestarr777 wrote:
Texas is essentially the big fat slow bully who wears a helmet on the playground. He runs around in circles screaming about running away from school when he doesn't get his way but the minute he falls down and gets a booboo he wants all the damn attention. Meanwhile the rest of the schoolyard just rolls their eyes and lets them get away with it cause its not nice to pick on the handicapped.

Reported unless its ok to insult 20mm people for no fething reason.

We constantly insult other countries and states on this forum (you especially) get off your high horse

 Frazzled wrote:

 feeder wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

lonestarr777 wrote:
Texas is essentially the big fat slow bully who wears a helmet on the playground. He runs around in circles screaming about running away from school when he doesn't get his way but the minute he falls down and gets a booboo he wants all the damn attention. Meanwhile the rest of the schoolyard just rolls their eyes and lets them get away with it cause its not nice to pick on the handicapped.

Reported unless its ok to insult 20mm people for no fething reason.

20mm people is an awkward scale. Most gamers prefer either 15mm or 28mm.

6mm baby. Nothing says loving like dancing revenant titans !


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ustrello wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

lonestarr777 wrote:
Texas is essentially the big fat slow bully who wears a helmet on the playground. He runs around in circles screaming about running away from school when he doesn't get his way but the minute he falls down and gets a booboo he wants all the damn attention. Meanwhile the rest of the schoolyard just rolls their eyes and lets them get away with it cause its not nice to pick on the handicapped.

Reported unless its ok to insult 20mm people for no fething reason.

We constantly insult other countries and states on this forum (you especially) get off your high horse

But I'm just a big fat slow bully remember?

 Frazzled wrote:

lonestarr777 wrote:
Texas is essentially the big fat slow bully who wears a helmet on the playground. He runs around in circles screaming about running away from school when he doesn't get his way but the minute he falls down and gets a booboo he wants all the damn attention. Meanwhile the rest of the schoolyard just rolls their eyes and lets them get away with it cause its not nice to pick on the handicapped.

Reported unless its ok to insult 20mm people for no fething reason.

 Frazzled wrote:
Only about cat lovers and of course, Liechtenstein.

 Ustrello wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Only about cat lovers and of course, Liechtenstein.

Or that time you threatened to kill someone

lonestarr777 wrote:
I'm reminded of that old saying, about glass houses Fraz.

If it makes you feel any better I'm from Ohio, the state that is pretty much that uncle who starts every conversation with "I'm not racsist bbbuuuttt..."

President Obama allowed a resolution condemning Israeli settlement construction in disputed Palestinian territory to pass through the United Nations Security Council, marking a dramatic change in U.S. policy just weeks before leaving office.

The U.S. did not go so far as to vote for the resolution, but allowed it to pass by abstaining from the vote after decades of vetoing such proposals at the Security Council. Obama ordered the veto of a similar resolution in 2011, but his administration has grown increasingly critical of the settlements in the past year and frustrated with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government, which the Obama team sees as partially responsible for the failure of recent Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power prefaced her statement on the abstention by quoting President Reagan's 1982 statement that "settlement activity is in no way necessary for the security of Israel" in order to situate Obama's decision in the current of U.S. foreign policy history.

"Our vote today is fully in line with the bipartisan history of how American presidents have approached both the issue and the role of this body," Power said.

But Power bracketed that statement by condemning U.N. hostility toward Israel.

"For the simple truth is that as long as Israel has been a member of this institution, Israel has been treated differently from other nations at the United Nations," she said, noting that the U.N. General Assembly and Human Rights Council adopted a combined 30 resolutions targeting Israel in 2016, "more than those focused on Syria, North Korea, Iran and South Sudan put together."

Power cited that history to explain why the U.S. wouldn't formally support the resolution. "One cannot completely separate the vote from the venue," she said. "It is because this forum too often continues to be biased against Israel, because there are important issues that are not sufficiently addressed in this resolution, and because the United States does not agree with every word in this text that the United States did not vote in favor of this resolution.

"But it is because this resolution reflects the facts on the ground," she continued, "and is consistent with U.S. policy across Republican and Democratic administrations throughout the history of Israel that the United States did not veto it."

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., called Obama's decision "absolutely shameful" in a statement released after the vote, and looked toward the future Trump administration to "reverse the damage done" to the U.S.-Israel relationship by Obama.

"Today's vote is a blow to peace that sets a dangerous precedent for further diplomatic efforts to isolate and demonize Israel," Ryan said. "Our unified Republican government will work to reverse the damage done by this administration, and rebuild our alliance with Israel."

Israeli officials have accused Obama of overseeing an "abandonment of Israel" in his final days.

"The U.S administration secretly cooked up with the Palestinians an extreme anti-Israeli resolution behind Israel's back which would be a tail wind for terror and boycotts and effectively make the Western Wall occupied Palestinian territory," one official told the Associated Press.

Secretary of State John Kerry canceled a speech intended to accompany the resolution when the vote, originally scheduled for Thursday, was postponed, but he offered a detailed argument against current Israeli policy in early December.

"Many of these outposts, most of them, are built on what is considered to be Palestinian private land," Kerry said Dec. 4 at the Saban Forum. "I'm not here to tell you that the settlements are the reason for the conflict. No, they're not. No, they're not. But I also cannot accept the notion that they don't affect the peace process, that they aren't a barrier to the capacity to have peace."

Senate Republicans tried to kill the resolution by threatening to cut funding for the United Nations and any countries on the Security Council that vote for the resolution.

"Any nation which backs this resolution and receives assistance from the United States will put that assistance in jeopardy," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Friday morning.

President-elect Trump and Senate Republicans could find bipartisan support for ameliorating the effect of the vote on Israel, given the Democratic opposition to the resolution. "The draft United Nations resolution directly contradicts the Senate resolution I authored – and passed unanimously last year – condemning Palestinian terrorism and calling on all parties to return to the negotiating table immediately and without preconditions," Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said Thursday. "This United Nations resolution would undermine, if not undo, the chances for productive discussions between the two sides."

Kerry argued in December that Israeli government is short-circuiting such talks by pursuing the settlement policy. "The left in Israel is telling everybody they are a barrier to peace, and the right that supports it openly supports it because they don't want peace," he said. "They believe it's the greater Israel . . . And more than 50 percent of the ministers in the current government have publicly stated they are opposed to a Palestinian state and there will be no Palestinian state."

 whembly wrote:
Payback for Trump's promise to move US Embassy to Jerusalem?

 Breotan wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Payback for Trump's promise to move US Embassy to Jerusalem?

I don't know if this has anything to do with Trump or not. The Obama administration hasn't exactly been the friendliest administration Israel has ever known.

 whembly wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Payback for Trump's promise to move US Embassy to Jerusalem?

I don't know if this has anything to do with Trump or not. The Obama administration hasn't exactly been the friendliest administration Israel has ever known.

Seems cowardly to 'abstain' on this vote, when in the past, the US veto'ed it. Especially since Obama is on his way out in 3 weeks, to not deal with the consequences.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Payback for Trump's promise to move US Embassy to Jerusalem?

I don't know if this has anything to do with Trump or not. The Obama administration hasn't exactly been the friendliest administration Israel has ever known.

Seems cowardly to 'abstain' on this vote, when in the past, the US veto'ed it. Especially since Obama is on his way out in 3 weeks, to not deal with the consequences.

It isn't cowardly to not veto a condemnation of a practice that you don't agree with.

Why should America support Israels annexation of neighbouring territory through the settlements when it increases palestinian resentment and makes terrorist attacks more likely?

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Looks like they are going to try the "First Amendment Defense Act". Because passing a low to allow gay couple to be discriminated against (and will get shut down immediately because of how unconstitutional it is) is exactly what this country needs!

 Pouncey wrote:
I think that Trump might discover that the most unexpected challenge of building his proposed wall along the US-Mexico border is that first they'll have to demolish the wall that's already there. Because G.W. Bush already had that idea like a decade ago.

Didn't work, did it?

 CptJake wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
I think that Trump might discover that the most unexpected challenge of building his proposed wall along the US-Mexico border is that first they'll have to demolish the wall that's already there. Because G.W. Bush already had that idea like a decade ago.

Didn't work, did it?

Perhaps because it didn't happen?

There is no fence/barrier/wall along the whole border, not even close.

 CptJake wrote:
Most parts of the border are lacking. I think they did less than 700 miles, and not all contiguous.

And where there are good barriers which are patrolled, the flow of people is channeled to legal crossings with check points.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico–United_States_barrier

As folks who understand obstacles and barriers will tell you, any obstacle or barrier which is not watched/patrolled is NOT an obstacle or barrier.

Ignorant people focus on The Wall which Trump wants built, instead the focus should be on the policies (and resourcing) which accompany the wall which will ultimately determine how effective it is or is not.