Jump to content

Hey, Obama Lovers

baddog

By baddog
in Political Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

baddog

baddog

Posted
Posted

Just some facts to chew on....


Here is an interesting fact for my American friends: During the 3-1/2 years of World War 2 that started with the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor in December 1941 and ended with the Surrender of Germany and Japan in 1945, "The People of the U.S.A."  produced the following:
22 aircraft carriers,
8 battleships,
48 cruisers,
349 destroyers,
420 destroyer escorts,
203 submarines,
34 million tons of merchant ships,
100,000 fighter aircraft,
98,000 bombers,
24,000 transport aircraft,
58,000 training aircraft,
93,000 tanks,
257,000 artillery pieces,
105,000 mortars,
3,000,000 machine guns, and
2,500,000 military trucks.
We put 16.1 million men in uniform in the various armed services, invaded Africa, invaded Sicily and Italy, won the battle for the Atlantic, planned and executed D-Day, marched across the Pacific and Europe, developed the atomic bomb, and ultimately conquered Japan and Germany.

It's worth noting, that during the almost exact amount of time, the Obama Administration couldn't even build a web site that worked.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UT alum

UT alum

Posted
Posted
On 12/22/2019 at 10:54 AM, baddog said:

Just some facts to chew on....


Here is an interesting fact for my American friends: During the 3-1/2 years of World War 2 that started with the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor in December 1941 and ended with the Surrender of Germany and Japan in 1945, "The People of the U.S.A."  produced the following:
22 aircraft carriers,
8 battleships,
48 cruisers,
349 destroyers,
420 destroyer escorts,
203 submarines,
34 million tons of merchant ships,
100,000 fighter aircraft,
98,000 bombers,
24,000 transport aircraft,
58,000 training aircraft,
93,000 tanks,
257,000 artillery pieces,
105,000 mortars,
3,000,000 machine guns, and
2,500,000 military trucks.
We put 16.1 million men in uniform in the various armed services, invaded Africa, invaded Sicily and Italy, won the battle for the Atlantic, planned and executed D-Day, marched across the Pacific and Europe, developed the atomic bomb, and ultimately conquered Japan and Germany.

It's worth noting, that during the almost exact amount of time, the Obama Administration couldn't even build a web site that worked.

 

I just read this. That’s about the most bulls**t comparison I’ve yet seen. From ‘41 - ‘45 our country was almost 100% united. President Obama’s term began with the senate majority leader, Moscow Mitch McConnel announcing his number one priority in his position was, what? His constituents? No. It was to make Obama a one term president. Good things happen when the United States are united. trump is what happens when we’re not. What’s gonna be his contribution? 150 yards of fence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, UT alum said:

I just read this. That’s about the most bulls**t comparison I’ve yet seen. From ‘41 - ‘45 our country was almost 100% united. President Obama’s term began with the senate majority leader, Moscow Mitch McConnel announcing his number one priority in his position was, what? His constituents? No. It was to make Obama a one term president. Good things happen when the United States are united. trump is what happens when we’re not. What’s gonna be his contribution? 150 yards of fence?

That's the goal of either party when their guy isn't the President.  I know you want your little Trump hating statements to be true so bad...but they're not.

Trump (or any other President) will never be able to unite the socialist wing of your party with normal Americans...they're gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stevenash

stevenash

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, UT alum said:

I just read this. That’s about the most bulls**t comparison I’ve yet seen. From ‘41 - ‘45 our country was almost 100% united. President Obama’s term began with the senate majority leader, Moscow Mitch McConnel announcing his number one priority in his position was, what? His constituents? No. It was to make Obama a one term president. Good things happen when the United States are united. trump is what happens when we’re not. What’s gonna be his contribution? 150 yards of fence?

And Obama's " contribution" was?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UT alum

UT alum

Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

That's the goal of either party when their guy isn't the President.  I know you want your little Trump hating statements to be true so bad...but they're not.

Trump (or any other President) will never be able to unite the socialist wing of your party with normal Americans...they're gone.

No, it is not the goal of either party’s leadership. Moscow Mitch was the first, at least in the modern era, to openly state such a goal. I don’t hate trump. I think he is grossly under qualified for the position he holds, especially where foreign relations are concerned, making the leader of the free world a national security risk. Sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UT alum

UT alum

Posted
Posted
On 12/30/2019 at 8:09 AM, baddog said:

I think it was exaggerated facts to drop a bomb Obama (comical). However, Obama divided the races with his cop and professor, you know, sharing a beer. Trump is tearing up the deep state, which needs to be done. Dimwits have shown to be the divisive ones. Good try.

The races have been divided since 1787. C’mon man, at least acknowledge our country’s history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stevenash

stevenash

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, UT alum said:

The races have been divided since 1787. C’mon man, at least acknowledge our country’s history.

Since 1787?  Really?   Sounds like the proposition that  division is the fault of a certain political party is a  an absolute and overt joke but so many ( including you) seem to accept said proposition.  Why is that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted
47 minutes ago, UT alum said:

No, it is not the goal of either party’s leadership. Moscow Mitch was the first, at least in the modern era, to openly state such a goal. I don’t hate trump. I think he is grossly under qualified for the position he holds, especially where foreign relations are concerned, making the leader of the free world a national security risk. Sad.

You don’t know what you’re talking about. The goal is to ALWAYS try to remove the opposition party President ASAP.

As far as Trump being qualified, he’s about to sign phase one of a huge trade deal with China, something no other President has been able to accomplish.

We don’t get punked by other countries like we did under your hero, including Russia.  I know you like to make the claim but the evidence shows different.

What is sad is that many lefties just can’t realize they are better off than they were three years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UT alum

UT alum

Posted
Posted
On 12/31/2019 at 8:48 AM, stevenash said:

Since 1787?  Really?   Sounds like the proposition that  division is the fault of a certain political party is a  an absolute and overt joke but so many ( including you) seem to accept said proposition.  Why is that?

It’s the fault of a nation, not a party. Good grief. I don’t see all issues as “us” vs. “them”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UT alum

UT alum

Posted
Posted
On 12/31/2019 at 9:11 AM, LumRaiderFan said:

You don’t know what you’re talking about. The goal is to ALWAYS try to remove the opposition party President ASAP.

As far as Trump being qualified, he’s about to sign phase one of a huge trade deal with China, something no other President has been able to accomplish.

We don’t get punked by other countries like we did under your hero, including Russia.  I know you like to make the claim but the evidence shows different.

What is sad is that many lefties just can’t realize they are better off than they were three years ago.

I do know what I’m talking about, we just don’t agree. Hide and watch on the China deal. Xi’s gonna play him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stevenash

stevenash

Posted
Posted

Every single time a deal is made between two parties, each believes he/she got the best of the deal or it would not have been made.  The financial markets ( whose collective wisdom is greater than that of anyone or anything else) are obviously not interpreting the china/us negotiations as having negative implications.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Member Statistics

    46,202
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    CHSFalcon
    Newest Member
    CHSFalcon
    Joined


×
×
  • Create New...