What a shitty time for the US of A

.frenchyhttps://www.newschoolers.com/videos/watch/773755/--------U-S--Armed-Forces---We-Must-Fight---President-Reagan--HD--2015--------


He's not a pussy like obama, don't try to tell me that MY OWN opinion was wrong.


I don't care if I wasn't alive for his presidency, I can read books lol

We could only tell you that if it was you opinion too- Unless you can tell us what made him so great we are just going to assume you're just retweeting a post from #FauxNews


Also lol at you reading books Frenchy... Come on man nice try. We know you just believe whatever they tell you, and that is nothing new.

.frenchyRonald Reagan was an actor before he was president, and he was one of the best. How badly do you want to be American? Every thread about the USA you always have to post in lol

Ronald Reagan was the worst president we ever had. He was truly evil.

Huck_NorrisWe could only tell you that if it was you opinion too- Unless you can tell us what made him so great we are just going to assume you're just retweeting a post from #FauxNews


Also lol at you reading books Frenchy... Come on man nice try. We know you just believe whatever they tell you, and that is nothing new.

He won the Cold War, lowered tax rates, was anti-union, anti-communist, he gave free enterprise and limited government interaction with businesses

.frenchyHe won the Cold War, lowered tax rates, was anti-union, anti-communist, he gave free enterprise and limited government interaction with businesses

How does one win a war with no figting? Also unions are good, they represent the people.

Granite_StateHow does one win a war with no figting?

His policies AND SHIT.

:^)

I don't get what you're saying, are you trying to say the cold war wasnt a war? or that you cant win a war without fighting? Because obviously one side had to win the war....

.frenchyHis policies AND SHIT.

:^)

I don't get what you're saying, are you trying to say the cold war wasnt a war? or that you cant win a war without fighting? Because obviously one side had to win the war....

The Cold War was in essence an information war. A lot of flexing of muscles with almost nothing but a stockpile of nuclear warheads to show for it. If Americans think we won the war because communism didn't spread here (even though it never would have) then cool, but if you look at it from a historical perspective no one won.

Just curious, do you think we won Vietnam too?

Granite_StateThe Cold War was in essence an information war. A lot of flexing of muscles with almost nothing but a stockpile of nuclear warheads to show for it. If Americans think we won the war because communism didn't spread here (even though it never would have) then cool, but if you look at it from a historical perspective no one won.

Just curious, do you think we won Vietnam too?

Vietnam did win. they accomplished their objective. USA did not.


How else do you define winning a war?

.frenchyHis policies AND SHIT.

:^)

I don't get what you're saying, are you trying to say the cold war wasnt a war? or that you cant win a war without fighting? Because obviously one side had to win the war....

if a war would have been fought between US and Russia we would not exist right now, we'd be a fucking history lesson to martians because we would blow each other off the face of the fucking earth.

there were satellite wars fought that were RELATED to the Cold War but the cold war was a war that was never anything more than nukes and the shit you did in black ops one.

californiagrownVietnam did win. they accomplished their objective. USA did not.


How else do you define winning a war?

I think we are on the same side here. I'm saying we didn't win Vietnam, but a lot of Americans believe we did.

I'm also saying I don't think Reagan won the Cold War, if anything the soviets just lost it.

Granite_StateI think we are on the same side here. I'm saying we didn't win Vietnam, but a lot of Americans believe we did.

I'm also saying I don't think Reagan won the Cold War, if anything the soviets just lost it.

No, we did win the cold war. Same logic- America acomplished its objective of stopping the spread of communism, and the soviets failed in tehir objective of communism taking over the world.


Moral of the story, we should cull all people with a BF% over 25%. And the fucking Ruskies lost.

Granite_StateThe Cold War was in essence an information war. A lot of flexing of muscles with almost nothing but a stockpile of nuclear warheads to show for it. If Americans think we won the war because communism didn't spread here (even though it never would have) then cool, but if you look at it from a historical perspective no one won.

Just curious, do you think we won Vietnam too?

no way vietnam was a shit show and a half. fuckin vietcong hiding in caves and shit

we win all our other wars though : )

.frenchyno way vietnam was a shit show and a half. fuckin vietcong hiding in caves and shit

we win all our other wars though : )

not The Drug War!!!!


Ha!

Californiagrown 1
frenchy 0

californiagrownnot The Drug War!!!!

> declare war on inanimate object
> lose
#america

las.> declare war on inanimate object
> lose
#america

but at least we can keep arming militias, that never ends up bad, right gang?

its interesting to see you guys having an argument or a discussion about your next president. i just want to give you guys my thoughts on this topic, trying to be neutral as a Swiss (what I actually am).

compared to our system, witch is a direct democracy, you're type of making politics is much more topic-orientated. i.e. gay marriages, tax cuts for this group and so on. in my opinion, this makes thinks very easy to control and manipulate. as one here already said, its either democrat or republican. and do you really believe they will have their own agenda after being elected to be part in the race for president... as here in Europe, at a certain level of politics, you need to have lots of money to fund your campaign. this money usually comes from company's. here it doesn't matter if you're rep or democrat. so in the end, as a politician you're either against gay marriage or not. luckily this isn't important for these corporations. and as I've read through this topic, its mostly what I've observed, you guys agree that whats going on is shit, but you're still debating on whats better.. or less worse..

in my opinion this is the masterstroke. people fight about topics witch aren't really live changing to the country. but the main topics aren't even discussed, not by republicans nor democrats. why, because these corporations paying the politicians don't want a chance in these topics... that's also why you never read about it in newspapers...

just imagine someone how would really want to change anything. do you think he would get the same media attention as bush? or clinton? imagine someone was to chance the root of all problems, the monetary system, big pharma, genfood, education, think he would even be considered as president?

i really don't want to offend anyone, just think about it. but as long as you all are fighting against each other, they will always win... it called divide and conquer...

and sorry for my english... its not native to me

Meisiits interesting to see you guys having an argument or a discussion about your next president. i just want to give you guys my thoughts on this topic, trying to be neutral as a Swiss (what I actually am).

compared to our system, witch is a direct democracy, you're type of making politics is much more topic-orientated. i.e. gay marriages, tax cuts for this group and so on. in my opinion, this makes thinks very easy to control and manipulate. as one here already said, its either democrat or republican. and do you really believe they will have their own agenda after being elected to be part in the race for president... as here in Europe, at a certain level of politics, you need to have lots of money to fund your campaign. this money usually comes from company's. here it doesn't matter if you're rep or democrat. so in the end, as a politician you're either against gay marriage or not. luckily this isn't important for these corporations. and as I've read through this topic, its mostly what I've observed, you guys agree that whats going on is shit, but you're still debating on whats better.. or less worse..

in my opinion this is the masterstroke. people fight about topics witch aren't really live changing to the country. but the main topics aren't even discussed, not by republicans nor democrats. why, because these corporations paying the politicians don't want a chance in these topics... that's also why you never read about it in newspapers...

just imagine someone how would really want to change anything. do you think he would get the same media attention as bush? or clinton? imagine someone was to chance the root of all problems, the monetary system, big pharma, genfood, education, think he would even be considered as president?

i really don't want to offend anyone, just think about it. but as long as you all are fighting against each other, they will always win... it called divide and conquer...

and sorry for my english... its not native to me

you're not offending anyone and you're right. Those social topics are there to distract the population. Let the people argue over gay rights while the billionaires secure their futures. And the whole 2 party system is a joke since the top contenders from both parties recieve funding from the same Special Interest Groups. We need a revolution but we're too lazy and busy at the same time. I guess we're too "comfortable" to revolt (relatively speaking)

.frenchyI mean at least Trump knows how to deal with money and create jobs? So fucking what if he has a big mouth?


There are like 5 other repub candidates that i'd vote for too. Carson, Cruz, Jindal, Perry, Walker

Good freaking Lord you are as dumb as a box of rocks.
Trump filed for corporate BK FOUR TIMES now. You want him handling your money?

/Rant