sherpa

We're both on the same page. I am merely pointing out that US influence is much less than it used to be. The first thing we need to do is lock the border to illegal immigration. Unless that happens, and we develop a spine, nothing else matters.

That would be great, and I fully agree, but we are much further away from attaining change than we were decades ago. The US' reputation in South/Central America has declined over the years. Trump didn't help and polling revealed that. Biden certainly hasn't moved the ball forward. I spent ten months a year going down there from 2003 until 2015. Had a business partner in Paraguay who is still one of my best friends. Had the opportunity to witness the entire Chavez political nonsense up close. The systemic problems are immense. Corruption is an intractable, accepted way of life. There is profound class structure and sexism. Anyway, it's a problem that the US does not, currently, have the ability to influence. The first step is to lock the border to any non legal immigration. Once these failed govs are unable to dispose of those they don't want, they will have to deal with the very significant problems they are not addressing. Each country is different, but the ruling political entities are all powerful.

Not true. The US has been very effective in thwarting missile attacks. What we should do is demolish these non-state attacks against commercial, non combatant commerce. It would take less than a day, if the administration had the nuts to do it. Otherwise, we have what we have, which is a task force under constant alert, responding to a threat we could end in a wink. Make sense to the Biden group here? Not to me.

Jesus. The claim that the US Navy "lost a battle at sea" is idiotic.

First, Israel did not invade the Gaza. I was responding to a claim suggested by someone else. Perhaps you didn't, or couldn't read it, so I'll post it again: "What if this is about natural gas in Gaza? Would your opinion of Israel and our government change if there’s gas in Gaza? " I have no idea why you couldn't figure this out, but my claim that it is a preposterous theory stands. Hamas did this, and actions cause reactions. Maybe you can get this without a Trump/Putin reference. By the way, still waiting for anything that supports your revisionist claim. Total, unsupported nonsense.

Look at how the media has framed the New Hampshire thing. Trump suggested she claimed victory. Absolute nonsense, unless you disregard her acknowledgement of his win and her congratulations directed to him. He made the ridiculous claim and they ran with it. Perhaps they are deeply concerned with how Haley demolishes Joe in current polling.

You post the most stupid crap, If you are inferring that Israel "invaded" Gaza as a desire to obtain a potential energy source, that is lunacy. If not, I don't get what you are suggesting. Nobody on planet earth is desirous of the potential fuel resources in the Gaza strip. Hamas broke a ceasefire. Hamas has had 16 years of rule to advance those people's lives. All they have done is take all their resources and build an underground war bunker designed to eliminate Israel. Neither Putin nor Trump has anything to do with this, but like a drug addict, you simply cannot resist.

Got it. I'm not there yet, but all signs affirm your view. My hope is that a more reasonable, less martyr mission candidate causes Congress to shift in ways Trump's presence has been woefully horrible in the past two elections. While I detest this "lawfare," it is what it is.

I don't get what you are claiming here. She would have little or no effect on candidates in Senate and House races. What she does is not piss off 50% of domestics and a host of foreign nations who are quite sick of this crap. We need a change. We need some kind of leadership that unites. It sure as hell isn't this infirm we have in office, and I don't think it is Trump.

We have zero need for natural gas.

Don't agree. I don't care who funds her campaign, as long as she keeps challenging Trump. Nikki Haley gets conservative Congressional seats. Trump does not. She is smart, accomplished and not a lightning rod for more chaos. She would demolish Trump in debate, and would bring in a host of new, bright supporters to a gov that has been dysfunctional for years.

Your superior intelligence? OK

You are clearly crazy. When have I ever gotten upset at anything anybody said about Putin? Did you imagine this? Reading what you post presents a dilemma. There is so much nonsense that the conversation can never lead to anything beyond responding to your nonsense. You have authored one idiotic post after another this PM, so I will never get to your question about what I think is a wise Congressional strategy regarding Ukraine aid, which there is no doubt that I support, and have here, repeatedly.

You are truly a goof. I never "whined" about helping Ukraine. That is the purest of pure BS. I supported it, and even provided a link to an extremely informed youtube that explained the value of it, which I undeniably support. I doubt you noticed that, because you're not good at noticing stuff. The rest of this is pure manure. Your demands that people label things, Putin as a terrorist/war criminal, which I have, and dropping cluster bombs as a war crime are not going to be responded to by me. I don't work for you. You don't interest me.

Are you really as goofy as you appear? I'll ask for the third time. What is the basis for your "revisionist" claim? It can't be that hard for you to answer. Answer that, and I'll respond, eagerly, to you latest query.

What does your new question have to do with the allegation of revisionist history? What are you suggesting? Answer that and I'll be glad to answer your latest query.

Nothing revisionist about it.

And this posture and policy of deterrence has prevented a cataclysmic WWIII for a very long time. Far longer than it took Europe to get into one between I and II. Doesn't bother me that you don't like it, but it seems to have worked, and there's a generation of soldiers here raising their families and living their lives that are grateful.

More nonsense. We don't like to fight anyone. We are just reluctant to start WWIII with a massive nuclear risk over things that have a less than critical national interest. That makes a lot of sense to me.

She's my choice. In my fantasy world, Trump displays the guts to debate her. She would destroy him and give us a real choice between an invalid and a rude punk whose ideas are not that bad, but has the unique ability to make reasonable people despise him.

Nothing strange about it. I've expressed my support of the Ukraine against Russia many times. No need to post the same crap every day, over and over.......Oh wait.......I'm talking to the wrong guy.

I have zero interest in your judgement of my credibility here. I have had the opportunity to be part of the force that has defended shipping in that part of the world, and I am familiar with what is involved and how both sides operate. I am extremely aware of similar situations in the past, Operation Praying Mantis for one, where the US Navy sunk half the Iranian Navy in half a day, and could have finished the job but was ordered to stand down. I have serious doubts about someone who says that our women are whores, that the loss of two Seals doesn't matter becasue "they shouldn't be there," and makes a lot of other stupid claims like putting US strikes against offensive missiles preparing to launch against defenseless commercial ships ahead of those launces, exactly the opposite of how this whack a mole operation actually happened. By the way, I don't play blind to anything. I simply don't read everything posted here, and am especially not interested in crazy stuff. Still, to the issue of weapons getting to Gaza and Hezbollah, of course they get them. There are many ways to get them through using land routes through Syria. That's why the world sees the occasional strike against these shipments, and why a manufacturing/storage facility in the Sudan was struck a few years ago.

They should be allowed to disrupt international shipping as long as they don't kill anyone? Do you think that they have any level of control over what happens when an anti ship missile with a warhead impacts a commercial, non armored vessel with civilians simply doing their jobs onboard? The rest of the world should tolerate this becasue they suck at it and haven't managed to kill anyone yet? They have been firing missiles and guiding drones at Israel. They have boarded and hijacked a commercial ship in the Red Sea. They have attacked more than two dozen other ships with missiles, drones and speed boats. Does any rational, thinking human being believe this is justified or that they are only attacking weapons shipments to Israel? You've already got the time line wrong. Now you provide some bizarre logic that these actions, by a non-state group of rebels is justified becasue they haven't succeeded in killing anyone, though they have hit commercial ships. Thankfully, not too many nations agree with you.

You have your timeline wrong. No surprise. The US, UK and other members of a large coalition did nothing until this subcontractor, among many, of Iran decided to launch weapons to disrupt and kill non combatants. Gaza blockades are the result of Iranian weapons shipments used to indiscriminately kill Israeli citizens. No government allows that. There is no justification for what the Houthis are doing, and no legitimate "woe is me" argument, anymore than claiming that all our women are whores. You, by the way, are not the first in that culture that I have heard make that preposterous claim.

Simple yes or no question. I've read a number of these posts re Davos. Have you listened to the interviews that have been televised from these folks? I have, and have for years. Not because it's interesting viewing, I'm just a 7:30 to 8:30 CNBC listener for years. Lots of people have posted lots of views on this, and I'm wondering if they ever watch this stuff. Obviously, it seems to me, they haven't, but in the interest of polite conversation, I thought I'd ask.