-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Fidel Castro has died at 90.
- Thread starter ArcadiaGP
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
What holds true. Not kissing their asses? Yeah. It holds true for all administrations. Just sending a delegation to a state funeral, in itself, isn't kissing their ass. Kissing their ass is kissing their ass. And once you've kissed their ass, sending an ass kissing delegation to a state funeral to kiss their ass, is kissing their ass. You see, it's the ass kissing part that I don't approve of.
Windmills and hot air indeed.
indiucky
Grandmaster
Bush was former head of the CIA...He was there spying and to make sure Jane Fonda didn't show up to offer hummers to the commies...
For a child of the Cold War you really have a lack of understanding of international espionage and covert operations...
You should probably rent Austin Powers....
Nah, it's pointing out the hypocrisy of double standards. People wouldn't dare find issue with the Golden Elephant. But hey, that guy from the other party, oh he's bad. I don't have an issue with Reagan sending HW to Brezhnev's funeral, not a bit. I think it was a smart call. So there's kinda not a "derangement," when I'm saying I actually agree with Reagan's action. I also have no issue with Obama sending reps to Castro's funeral, not a bit.
What I've noticed, is that a great many Conservatives are just as petty as Liberals. They both subscribe to massive amounts of hypocrisy....a type of hypocrisy that runs rampant on INGO.
indiucky
Grandmaster
I try telling you all this...I try...Kut IS conservative...He IS consistent and whenever you try to trap Kut by insinuating that he is not a "real" conservative, what you will actually find is a guy who remains consistent in his core conservative beliefs...
I will not comment on the evil side of him that sets traps for folks...He did that to me once and I had to chew my leg off....
Kut - this is a horse manure argument. As I said upstream "International Relations is the business of one country screwing another". Reagan sent HW to Brezhnev's BECAUSE HE FELT IT WAS IN AMERICA'S BEST INTEREST. Period. No Mo, No Less. His reason could have been kissing ass or kicking it, heck WE DON'T KNOW. Given Reagan's other statements, most folks would buy the "kicking it" side of things. Bottom line, he did it because he felt it was in our interests. If you thought that was a stupid idea on his part - fine, say so. If not - then c'est la vie.
Likewise with Obama sending folks to Castro's funeral. Whomever we choose to send WILL send a message. One way or the other. No getting around it. It will deliver a message going forward to the incoming Raul regime in Cuba . Will we extend the olive branch or the middle finger?
I see zero hypocrisy in choosing the message that we want to send. In Brezhnev's case, we wanted to keep communications open. When both sides are nuclear superpowers, that's generally a good idea. I suspect that he did it for that reason, and because he was a generally pretty cordial guy, and manners - even when you hated the person , mattered to Reagan. In Obama's case, Castro is a bit tyrant over a ****-ant island. Albeit one that is close to our borders. So keeping open communication is not the priority. Obama may choose to go, because he's a pretty cordial guy as well. And wants to be seen as a good dude and all. Even if he hated Castro.
I have no issue sending whatever delegation he feels is appropriate to Cuba. He could do that (as Reagan did) by making it clear that "We disagree/are enemies/whatever, but we can be polite about it". My problem with Obama is that he _doesn't disagree_ with Castro. The balance of his OTHER actions have amply shown that.
I think you have a preconceived opinion which drives your conclusions. You think I couldn't possibly be okay with Reagan sending a delegation to a Soviet funeral, and not be okay with Obama doing it, unless it's because I'm biased towards Reagan. You've failed to imagine why else I might do that.
What I have been trying to tell you, I have been very consistent in my disdain for Obama warming up to the Castro's. I think it's a mistake. I think it's spitting in the face of the Cubans who fled Castro. I do not support restoring relations with Cuba as things stand now. Therefore, I do not support Obama's overtures towards Cuba. This has nothing to do with Reagan. This is just you pursuing faux hypocrisy, as if someone couldn't possibly have the view I have without it. Nonsense.
I view Obama's actions towards Cuba as kissing Castro's ass. I've repeated asked you to give an example of Reagan kissing a Russian's ass like that. Rather, Reagan's tougher posture towards the Soviets helped end the Soviet Union. What the **** has Obama done?
I try telling you all this...I try...Kut IS conservative...He IS consistent and whenever you try to trap Kut by insinuating that he is not a "real" conservative, what you will actually find is a guy who remains consistent in his core conservative beliefs...
I will not comment on the evil side of him that sets traps for folks...He did that to me once and I had to chew my leg off....
Well, he is consistently trying to claim people are being hypocritical when, instead, he has an inadequate understanding of their standing.
