US Elections 2012 Obama v Romney Official Thread

[jeff m2]

Captain Cadillac said:

This is much more important to the election that some nonsense from Trump...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/23/state-d...

The clowns were too busy updating their facebook to open e mails

[unrepentant]

Captain Cadillac said:

This is much more important to the election that some nonsense from Trump...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/23/state-d...

See skip, if you had lived with 25 years of terrorism from the boyos you would know better. Every time something happened the provos or the real IRA or some faction would claim responsibility. The government quickly learned that you check these claims carefully and do not respond in a knee jerk way to give them the "credit" without ascertaining the facts. So the state department wanted to check the facts carefully before making a statement and as a result the viewers of FOX news were not told immediately! What a disaster!

I'm more worried about why a seemingly bright fellow like you is watching FOX news.

[unrepentant]

Like I said, the government would always wait to ensure that they were certain about who was responsible for any outrage before announcing it to the press, whether it be in Ulster or on the mainland.

[davepoth]

Guam said:

Actually more bks from you, usually <not always> the IRA <or whoever> would call with a pre agreed codeword. Having spent time in Northern Ireland including Night patrols in belfast and being in the OP on the top of the Diviss Flats they knew often as not ahead of time who the organisation was <and usually very soon afterwards if the pre notification failed>.


Any more crap you want to bring up?

Sorry; he was right. The "proper" IRA did have some rules that they liked to play by, but the lunatic fringes, the really nutty guys who were too mental for a major terrorist organisation, used to publicly claim attacks as their own as soon as they heard about them regardless of whether they did them or not.

Since it was so difficult to check who did it, the press could only report who claimed the attack, and so if they got the PR correct they got the kudos for the attack with none of the effort.

[Captain Cadillac]

Let's just use common sense for a minute.

The US Embassy in a very volatile area, with known Al Quaeda activity, was attacked. And not just a couple of RPGs were chucked at it, this was a full blown violent attack.

And this happened on September 11th. I don't need to pull out a slide rule to figure this out.

Edited for typos... Damn iPad.

Edited by Captain Cadillac on Wednesday 24th October 18:41

[jimmyjimjim]

unrepentant said:

So the state department wanted to check the facts carefully before making a statement

So, with that obviously being 100% true, whty then did they make some obviously retarded st up about it being in reaction to some film?

You can't have it both ways.

[vonuber]

Guam said:

No he wasnt right, plus I qualified my response, what most folk dont know <if they werent there> they knew who nearly every one of these guys were. Almost all the terrorist groups out there of consequence had code words. Occassionally the system broke down. But in the main they always KNEW who the perps were.
What may have been claimed in the PRESS was not representatitive of what was KNOWN. The public may not have been made aware is all.
Much has still not been disclosed.
Compared to AQ the NI terrorists were restrained <hard though that is to imagine>.

<have you never heard of brackets>

[davepoth]

Guam said:

No he wasnt right, plus I qualified my response, what most folk dont know <if they werent there> they knew who nearly every one of these guys were. Almost all the terrorist groups out there of consequence had code words. Occassionally the system broke down. But in the main they always KNEW who the perps were.
What may have been claimed in the PRESS was not representatitive of what was KNOWN. The public may not have been made aware is all.
Much has still not been disclosed.
Compared to AQ the NI terrorists were restrained <hard though that is to imagine>.

Of course they knew. But did the press know enough to be able to verify whether the claims were true or not? No. So when these groups rang the press and said it was them, the press could do nothing more than report that "xxx group claimed the attack".

[DJRC]

Mermaid said:

DJRC said:

Mermaid said:

Wants wars forthwith, economic & the other kind.

He isnt going to start any bloody wars ffs. Where the hell do ppl come up with this crap? Who the hell do ppl think he is going to invade??

If elected, and he does not wage war on Day 1 on China for currency manipulation, he will look rather silly.

& to believe he will not escalate the Syrian situation (in his own words, Iran's only friend & Republicans wanting more arms support) is a tad naive.

And do what in Syria? Start putting "advisors" on the ground? Offering airstrike capability? I think not.

[unrepentant]

davepoth said:

Of course they knew. But did the press know enough to be able to verify whether the claims were true or not? No. So when these groups rang the press and said it was them, the press could do nothing more than report that "xxx group claimed the attack".

The point I made had nothing to do with what the press say. My point was that what the government said (which is what we are talking about here) was backed up by the facts and the UK government never apportioned responsibility until they had confirmed it. The US government followed the same path and that is the correct one.

The Mourdock gaffe is dominating news coverage here today. The Romney campaign has now said he will not pull the ads supporting the man who is effectively telling the women of America to stop whinging and lay back and enjoy being raped because it's "God's will". It should shock but it doesn't really. Mourdock speaks for Ryan and plenty of others in the GOP. It defies belief that any woman can vote for these misogynists.

[Mermaid]

DJRC said:

And do what in Syria? Start putting "advisors" on the ground? Offering airstrike capability? I think not.

No point speculating, we will find out soon enough.

[unrepentant]

Like I said before, the UK government would make no official comment with regard to who may or may not have carried out an atrocity until they were satisfied that they were in full possesion of the facts. The US government appeared to have followed that protocol, which is correct. In the aftermath of these events all sorts of factions are liable to claim responsibility and the press will speculate. Governments generally are more responsible and do not speculate and will speak when they have facts.

[MadmanO/T People]

Reuters is predicting a huge Electoral College landslide for Obama.

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-romney-electo...

[davepoth]

Guam said:

And Gallup shows romney plus 3 And Rasmussen shows Romney plus 4

They are all nonsense this will be down to the turnout mobilisation. Organisationally that should favour Mr O

Because as the GOP are happy to point out, it's the only job he's ever had.

[unrepentant]

MadmanO/T People said:

Reuters is predicting a huge Electoral College landslide for Obama.

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-romney-electo...

It's possible but probably a little too optomistic. I'm predicting that Floridians will come to their senses and go blue but that Romney will pick up Wisconsin and Colorado which would give it to Obama by 313-225. Having said that both Colorado and Wisconsin are in play and he could sweep them. If Floridians go with Romney it will be Obama by 284-254.

[Captain Cadillac]

unrepentant said:

MadmanO/T People said:

Reuters is predicting a huge Electoral College landslide for Obama.

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-romney-electo...

It's possible but probably a little too optomistic. I'm predicting that Floridians will come to their senses and go blue but that Romney will pick up Wisconsin and Colorado which would give it to Obama by 313-225. Having said that both Colorado and Wisconsin are in play and he could sweep them. If Floridians go with Romney it will be Obama by 284-254.

I don't see Romney taking Wisconsin. I do see Romney taking Florida and he has a damn good shot in Ohio and Colorado.

[unrepentant]

Captain Cadillac said:

unrepentant said:

MadmanO/T People said:

Reuters is predicting a huge Electoral College landslide for Obama.

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-romney-electo...

It's possible but probably a little too optomistic. I'm predicting that Floridians will come to their senses and go blue but that Romney will pick up Wisconsin and Colorado which would give it to Obama by 313-225. Having said that both Colorado and Wisconsin are in play and he could sweep them. If Floridians go with Romney it will be Obama by 284-254.

I don't see Romney taking Wisconsin. I do see Romney taking Florida and he has a damn good shot in Ohio and Colorado.

He can take Wisconsin, Florida and Colorado and Obama still wins. Obama will win Ohio.

[GavinPearson]

davepoth said:

The "proper" IRA did have some rules that they liked to play by.

I don't recall when I was using London's tube system in the heart of the tourist area as a teenager in the midst of an IRA bombing campaign that there were any rules at all. They were quite happy to kill civillians too. And lots of people from outside of the UK were bankrolling them to do so without bothering to think about the consequences of their actions.

[DJRC]

Mermaid said:

DJRC said:

And do what in Syria? Start putting "advisors" on the ground? Offering airstrike capability? I think not.

No point speculating, we will find out soon enough.

I wasnt, my intitial point was that jack st was going to happen, you speculated that it was. The above is entirely sarcastic rhetoric.

[Ayahuasca]

Re Libya, I heard on a US news channel that security for the diplomats had been sub-contracted to a UK firm who were unarmed and patrolled the area with batons. Sorry, it was the Brits' fault!