|
|
Post by uwphoto on Feb 18, 2023 18:57:28 GMT -8
I'd vote for a brilliant, competent moderate....if I could get one...no matter party So not Nikki Haley? no way.... pandering to maga.. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2023 20:05:43 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Apr 3, 2023 20:44:34 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2023 17:51:25 GMT -8
Remember the “nothing to see here” posts? 😜 |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Apr 4, 2023 19:27:24 GMT -8
Remember the “nothing to see here” posts? 😜 Yes, sure do, as if what's said here is golden. Just move along. I know everything. Yes sir. You know all. What I read on here, I take it in, and go from there. Most people have an agenda/narrative so I act accordingly. What's also interesting, but not shocking, is that I haven't heard from Ryan about this news since you put up your post. Usually, he's locked and loaded to answer/spin it on a dime. Hmmmmm....... |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Apr 4, 2023 19:39:05 GMT -8
Remember the “nothing to see here” posts? 😜 Yes, sure do, as if what's said here is golden. Just move along. I know everything. Yes sir. You know all. What I read on here, I take it in, and go from there. Most people have an agenda/narrative so I act accordingly. What's also interesting, but not shocking, is that I haven't heard from Ryan about this news since you put up your post. Usually, he's locked and loaded to answer/spin it on a dime. Hmmmmm....... Sorry, I have a life (and the flu) and haven't read the updated story, only the headline. I'll get back to you. I'm sure you can find some other lazy, not shocking analysis that everyone here is clamoring for. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Apr 4, 2023 19:59:22 GMT -8
Yes, sure do, as if what's said here is golden. Just move along. I know everything. Yes sir. You know all. What I read on here, I take it in, and go from there. Most people have an agenda/narrative so I act accordingly. What's also interesting, but not shocking, is that I haven't heard from Ryan about this news since you put up your post. Usually, he's locked and loaded to answer/spin it on a dime. Hmmmmm....... Sorry, I have a life (and the flu) and haven't read the updated story, only the headline. I'll get back to you. I'm sure you can find some other lazy, not shocking analysis that everyone here is clamoring for. That's right, because your analysis is sooooo non-partisan, and spine tingling. Ha!!! Your analysis is very predictable and basically, "Yeah, yeah, yeah, we get it." 'Same ol biased stuff." But yeah, it is a bit interesting to see how you TRY to spin stuff, so I'll be waiting. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Apr 4, 2023 20:02:16 GMT -8
Sorry, I have a life (and the flu) and haven't read the updated story, only the headline. I'll get back to you. I'm sure you can find some other lazy, not shocking analysis that everyone here is clamoring for. That's right, because your analysis is sooooo non-partisan, and spine tingling. Ha!!! Your analysis is very predictable and basically, "Yeah, yeah, yeah, we get it." 'Same ol biased stuff." But yeah, it is a bit interesting to see how you TRY to spin stuff, so I'll be waiting. Coming from someone who thinks CNN is still left-leaning, I'm a little floored by this. Your only analysis (at all) so far is a couple of words. Can you explain why you think this is a big deal? |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Apr 4, 2023 20:09:22 GMT -8
That's right, because your analysis is sooooo non-partisan, and spine tingling. Ha!!! Your analysis is very predictable and basically, "Yeah, yeah, yeah, we get it." 'Same ol biased stuff." But yeah, it is a bit interesting to see how you TRY to spin stuff, so I'll be waiting. Coming from someone who thinks CNN is still left-leaning, I'm a little floored by this. Your only analysis (at all) so far is a couple of words. Can you explain why you think this is a big deal? Oh, CNN is still left leaning, but they needed to make an adjustment because their ratings were horrible. About the balloon, oh, I don't know, make because they were able to gather intelligence from sensitive military sites. That's all. Is it not that big of a deal now, only because you said that they did not gather intelligence? Uh huh. All of a sudden it's, "Tell me why it's such a big deal?" Can you ever say that you were simply wrong about something? Sheesh. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Apr 4, 2023 20:16:09 GMT -8
Coming from someone who thinks CNN is still left-leaning, I'm a little floored by this. Your only analysis (at all) so far is a couple of words. Can you explain why you think this is a big deal? Oh, CNN is still left leaning, but they needed to make an adjustment because their ratings were horrible. About the balloon, oh, I don't know, make because they were able to gather intelligence from sensitive military sites. That's all. Is it not that big of a deal now, only because you said that they did not gather intelligence? Uh huh. All of a sudden it's, "Tell me why it's such a big deal?" Can you ever say that you were simply wrong about something? Sheesh. They literally fired a reporter (Harwood) the day after he praised a Biden speech, while also commenting that Trump "imperiled democracy." Ratings? Try again. apnews.com/article/cnn-ratings-chris-licht-584ea2b45819d2cc416006d7bd8b77e8WB/Discovery took over with a mandate to shift WAY off their previous bearing. They covered Trump's entire batshit crazy speech tonight, with no pushback. So, yeah, no. Back to the balloon: Why is this a big deal? You're coming after me in a conversation I wasn't even in. Where is the analysis on why this is a big deal? Just answer the question. I'm guessing the short answer is "I don't know" but enlighten me. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Apr 4, 2023 20:29:06 GMT -8
Oh, CNN is still left leaning, but they needed to make an adjustment because their ratings were horrible. About the balloon, oh, I don't know, make because they were able to gather intelligence from sensitive military sites. That's all. Is it not that big of a deal now, only because you said that they did not gather intelligence? Uh huh. All of a sudden it's, "Tell me why it's such a big deal?" Can you ever say that you were simply wrong about something? Sheesh. They literally fired a reporter (Harwood) the day after he praised a Biden speech, while also commenting that Trump "imperiled democracy." Ratings? Try again. apnews.com/article/cnn-ratings-chris-licht-584ea2b45819d2cc416006d7bd8b77e8WB/Discovery took over with a mandate to shift WAY off their previous bearing. They covered Trump's entire batshit crazy speech tonight, with no pushback. So, yeah, no. Back to the balloon: Why is this a big deal? You're coming after me in a conversation I wasn't even in. Where is the analysis on why this is a big deal? Just answer the question. I'm guessing the short answer is "I don't know" but enlighten me. Too funny. If you could only not skip over stuff at your convenience, you would have seen that I answered your question. Read my post again. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Apr 4, 2023 20:43:45 GMT -8
They literally fired a reporter (Harwood) the day after he praised a Biden speech, while also commenting that Trump "imperiled democracy." Ratings? Try again. apnews.com/article/cnn-ratings-chris-licht-584ea2b45819d2cc416006d7bd8b77e8WB/Discovery took over with a mandate to shift WAY off their previous bearing. They covered Trump's entire batshit crazy speech tonight, with no pushback. So, yeah, no. Back to the balloon: Why is this a big deal? You're coming after me in a conversation I wasn't even in. Where is the analysis on why this is a big deal? Just answer the question. I'm guessing the short answer is "I don't know" but enlighten me. Too funny. If you could only not skip over stuff at your convenience, you would have seen that I answered your question. Read my post again. I read it. Parroting back a headline isn't analysis. Optically, the military lying/not being truthful up front about it is silly, it was going to be found out/made public. Now, Milley, Austin and others are in damage control, egg on face mode. www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/news/2023/03/27/military-debate-spy-balloon-00089097Seems like a ton of conflicting stories between military personnel. But this isn't really news and the meat and potatoes of the article indicate as such. It's just how the espionage game works. We have surveillance satellites over China, they have their own means. This is at least the fourth time it's happened in the last five or six years. Selective outrage just really isn't necessary. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Apr 4, 2023 21:18:35 GMT -8
Too funny. If you could only not skip over stuff at your convenience, you would have seen that I answered your question. Read my post again. I read it. Parroting back a headline isn't analysis. Optically, the military lying/not being truthful up front about it is silly, it was going to be found out/made public. Now, Milley, Austin and others are in damage control, egg on face mode. www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/news/2023/03/27/military-debate-spy-balloon-00089097Seems like a ton of conflicting stories between military personnel. But this isn't really news and the meat and potatoes of the article indicate as such. It's just how the espionage game works. We have surveillance satellites over China, they have their own means. This is at least the fourth time it's happened in the last five or six years. Selective outrage just really isn't necessary. You love to say that I parrot, like you're in the room with me when I'm reading it. I also read the article. You say that to massage your ego, like you come up with original stuff, and don't do the same. Hilarious. I choose to get to the point at times. Get to the gist of it. Some things are so obvious, you don't need to go on a long spiel to try and make yourself look more intelligent than you really are. Sorry to break this to you, but many think that your answers are a lot of blah, blah, blah, when you could have said a lot less and still would have gotten your point across. You come across as that person that everyone has encountered at least once in their life, who likes to hear themselves talk. You know, like Howard Cosell. Not good. Same ol biased stuff. "Look at me. I said more, so I know more than you." It's tiring. Of course you'll say that this isn't news, because you were wrong about it. You said that NO intelligence was captured by China. You would rather downgrade it, and spin it, lessen it, before you would admit that you were wrong about something. You just can't fathom saying those words. You can do it, Ryan. Say it, "I WAS WRONG." It's liberating. Try it. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Apr 4, 2023 21:39:33 GMT -8
I read it. Parroting back a headline isn't analysis. Optically, the military lying/not being truthful up front about it is silly, it was going to be found out/made public. Now, Milley, Austin and others are in damage control, egg on face mode. www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/news/2023/03/27/military-debate-spy-balloon-00089097Seems like a ton of conflicting stories between military personnel. But this isn't really news and the meat and potatoes of the article indicate as such. It's just how the espionage game works. We have surveillance satellites over China, they have their own means. This is at least the fourth time it's happened in the last five or six years. Selective outrage just really isn't necessary. You love to say that I parrot, like you're in the room with me when I'm reading it. I also read the article. You say that to massage your ego, like you come up with original stuff, and don't do the same. Hilarious. I choose to get to the point at times. Get to the gist of it. Some things are so obvious, you don't need to go on a long spiel to try and make yourself look more intelligent than you really are. Sorry to break this to you, but many think that your answers are a lot of blah, blah, blah, when you could have said a lot less and still would have gotten your point across. You come across as that person that everyone has encountered at least once in their life, who likes to hear themselves talk. You know, like Howard Cosell. Not good. Same ol biased stuff. "Look at me. I said more, so I know more than you." It's tiring. Of course you'll say that this isn't news, because you were wrong about it. You said that NO intelligence was captured by China. You would rather downgrade it, and spin it, lessen it, before you would admit that you were wrong about something. You just can't fathom saying those words. You can do it, Ryan. Say it, "I WAS WRONG." It's liberating. Try it. I mean when you verbatim repeat the headline of the article as "analysis"....there really isn't much to say. You didn't explain why it was a big deal, you just repeated what the headline said. Make myself look more intelligent? Lol. It's a message board. I don't care. I've said that countless times to you, but hey, whatever you want to think. So Josh told me I don't write enough, you're saying I write too much. Can't please anyone around here, damn it. Howard Cosell? Flattering. At the time, it was reported (by everyone) that the signals were blocked by our military assets. I can't foresee the future, and going back to that whole selective outrage thing, if this wasn't seized on by Republicans in Congress, nobody would care. Nobody even knew it happened three times under the Trump administration, with no consequences to China. Now, because the CJCS and the SecDef weren't upfront about it, it's going to be something else seized upon by the Republicans to cry about. My initial premise, based on the facts available, wasn't wrong. But, now, yes, I was incorrect, given the additional information. Signals were apparently gathered by the Chinese. Unfortunately, it will not be the last time that that occurs, as China doesn't really need balloons to spy on the United States. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Apr 4, 2023 21:43:12 GMT -8
You love to say that I parrot, like you're in the room with me when I'm reading it. I also read the article. You say that to massage your ego, like you come up with original stuff, and don't do the same. Hilarious. I choose to get to the point at times. Get to the gist of it. Some things are so obvious, you don't need to go on a long spiel to try and make yourself look more intelligent than you really are. Sorry to break this to you, but many think that your answers are a lot of blah, blah, blah, when you could have said a lot less and still would have gotten your point across. You come across as that person that everyone has encountered at least once in their life, who likes to hear themselves talk. You know, like Howard Cosell. Not good. Same ol biased stuff. "Look at me. I said more, so I know more than you." It's tiring. Of course you'll say that this isn't news, because you were wrong about it. You said that NO intelligence was captured by China. You would rather downgrade it, and spin it, lessen it, before you would admit that you were wrong about something. You just can't fathom saying those words. You can do it, Ryan. Say it, "I WAS WRONG." It's liberating. Try it. I mean when you verbatim repeat the headline of the article as "analysis"....there really isn't much to say. You didn't explain why it was a big deal, you just repeated what the headline said. Make myself look more intelligent? Lol. It's a message board. I don't care. I've said that countless times to you, but hey, whatever you want to think. So Josh told me I don't write enough, you're saying I write too much. Can't please anyone around here, damn it. Howard Cosell? Flattering. At the time, it was reported (by everyone) that the signals were blocked by our military assets. I can't foresee the future, and going back to that whole selective outrage thing, if this wasn't seized on by Republicans in Congress, nobody would care. Nobody even knew it happened three times under the Trump administration, with no consequences to China. Now, because the CJCS and the SecDef weren't upfront about it, it's going to be something else seized upon by the Republicans to cry about. My initial premise, based on the facts available, wasn't wrong. But, now, yes, I was incorrect, given the additional information. Signals were apparently gathered by the Chinese. Unfortunately, it will not be the last time that that occurs, as China doesn't really need balloons to spy on the United States.  |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Apr 4, 2023 21:48:30 GMT -8
I mean when you verbatim repeat the headline of the article as "analysis"....there really isn't much to say. You didn't explain why it was a big deal, you just repeated what the headline said. Make myself look more intelligent? Lol. It's a message board. I don't care. I've said that countless times to you, but hey, whatever you want to think. So Josh told me I don't write enough, you're saying I write too much. Can't please anyone around here, damn it. Howard Cosell? Flattering. At the time, it was reported (by everyone) that the signals were blocked by our military assets. I can't foresee the future, and going back to that whole selective outrage thing, if this wasn't seized on by Republicans in Congress, nobody would care. Nobody even knew it happened three times under the Trump administration, with no consequences to China. Now, because the CJCS and the SecDef weren't upfront about it, it's going to be something else seized upon by the Republicans to cry about. My initial premise, based on the facts available, wasn't wrong. But, now, yes, I was incorrect, given the additional information. Signals were apparently gathered by the Chinese. Unfortunately, it will not be the last time that that occurs, as China doesn't really need balloons to spy on the United States. I'm only here to impress you, aardvark. I hope my efforts aren't in vain. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Apr 4, 2023 21:50:19 GMT -8
You love to say that I parrot, like you're in the room with me when I'm reading it. I also read the article. You say that to massage your ego, like you come up with original stuff, and don't do the same. Hilarious. I choose to get to the point at times. Get to the gist of it. Some things are so obvious, you don't need to go on a long spiel to try and make yourself look more intelligent than you really are. Sorry to break this to you, but many think that your answers are a lot of blah, blah, blah, when you could have said a lot less and still would have gotten your point across. You come across as that person that everyone has encountered at least once in their life, who likes to hear themselves talk. You know, like Howard Cosell. Not good. Same ol biased stuff. "Look at me. I said more, so I know more than you." It's tiring. Of course you'll say that this isn't news, because you were wrong about it. You said that NO intelligence was captured by China. You would rather downgrade it, and spin it, lessen it, before you would admit that you were wrong about something. You just can't fathom saying those words. You can do it, Ryan. Say it, "I WAS WRONG." It's liberating. Try it. I mean when you verbatim repeat the headline of the article as "analysis"....there really isn't much to say. You didn't explain why it was a big deal, you just repeated what the headline said. Make myself look more intelligent? Lol. It's a message board. I don't care. I've said that countless times to you, but hey, whatever you want to think. So Josh told me I don't write enough, you're saying I write too much. Can't please anyone around here, damn it. Howard Cosell? Flattering. At the time, it was reported (by everyone) that the signals were blocked by our military assets. I can't foresee the future, and going back to that whole selective outrage thing, if this wasn't seized on by Republicans in Congress, nobody would care. Nobody even knew it happened three times under the Trump administration, with no consequences to China. Now, because the CJCS and the SecDef weren't upfront about it, it's going to be something else seized upon by the Republicans to cry about. My initial premise, based on the facts available, wasn't wrong. But, now, yes, I was incorrect, given the additional information. Signals were apparently gathered by the Chinese. Unfortunately, it will not be the last time that that occurs, as China doesn't really need balloons to spy on the United States. Ryan, if my response that the balloon collected sensitive material from military sites doesn't say enough, than you're not being genuine. That's what a lot of headlines do. They encapsulate what's inside the story. If you don't think I read the stories under headlines, you seriously underestimate me. I love to read. I love to learn things. I don't pretend to know everything. I ask questions, because I DON'T know everything. I hate long, drawn out responses that aren't needed. I hope this helps. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Apr 4, 2023 21:56:01 GMT -8
I mean when you verbatim repeat the headline of the article as "analysis"....there really isn't much to say. You didn't explain why it was a big deal, you just repeated what the headline said. Make myself look more intelligent? Lol. It's a message board. I don't care. I've said that countless times to you, but hey, whatever you want to think. So Josh told me I don't write enough, you're saying I write too much. Can't please anyone around here, damn it. Howard Cosell? Flattering. At the time, it was reported (by everyone) that the signals were blocked by our military assets. I can't foresee the future, and going back to that whole selective outrage thing, if this wasn't seized on by Republicans in Congress, nobody would care. Nobody even knew it happened three times under the Trump administration, with no consequences to China. Now, because the CJCS and the SecDef weren't upfront about it, it's going to be something else seized upon by the Republicans to cry about. My initial premise, based on the facts available, wasn't wrong. But, now, yes, I was incorrect, given the additional information. Signals were apparently gathered by the Chinese. Unfortunately, it will not be the last time that that occurs, as China doesn't really need balloons to spy on the United States. Ryan, if my response that the balloon collected sensitive material from military sites doesn't say enough, than you're not being genuine. That's what a lot of headlines do. They encapsulate what's inside the story. If you don't think I read the stories under headlines, you seriously underestimate me. I love to read. I love to learn things. I don't pretend to know everything. I ask questions, because I DON'T know everything. I hate long, drawn out responses that aren't needed. I hope this helps. It explains the what, not the *why*, which is what I asked. It's like the guy yelling, where the sidekick goes "YEAH!" because there's no additional...well, anything, to be shared. There's nothing wrong with reading, there's nothing wrong with expanding on thoughts. This is a forum for debate. Write a freakin' book! I don't think "Chinese foreign relations with the United States and counter-espionage" should be summed up in a few sentences. It's a complicated topic, much like the other thread that's dominating this section of the forum. The government here looks stupid, incompetent even, along with the military for their inability to figure out who to blame. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Apr 4, 2023 22:19:28 GMT -8
Ryan, if my response that the balloon collected sensitive material from military sites doesn't say enough, than you're not being genuine. That's what a lot of headlines do. They encapsulate what's inside the story. If you don't think I read the stories under headlines, you seriously underestimate me. I love to read. I love to learn things. I don't pretend to know everything. I ask questions, because I DON'T know everything. I hate long, drawn out responses that aren't needed. I hope this helps. It explains the what, not the *why*, which is what I asked. It's like the guy yelling, where the sidekick goes "YEAH!" because there's no additional...well, anything, to be shared. There's nothing wrong with reading, there's nothing wrong with expanding on thoughts. This is a forum for debate. Write a freakin' book! I don't think "Chinese foreign relations with the United States and counter-espionage" should be summed up in a few sentences. It's a complicated topic, much like the other thread that's dominating this section of the forum. The government here looks stupid, incompetent even, along with the military for their inability to figure out who to blame. No, it's not like that at all. You asked why is it a big deal. The Chinese collecting sensitive, military info says it all. It absolutely answers your question. You don't have to go on a long spiel, in some cases, when a few words do the trick. If you're asking me why China did it? Well, that's a ridiculous question. By the way, if you're enamored with the way Howard Cosell would go on and on, just to hear himself speak, I'm not shocked. It fits. He really loved to massage that ego. Although, he was really good in other ways of broadcasting. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Apr 4, 2023 22:48:52 GMT -8
It explains the what, not the *why*, which is what I asked. It's like the guy yelling, where the sidekick goes "YEAH!" because there's no additional...well, anything, to be shared. There's nothing wrong with reading, there's nothing wrong with expanding on thoughts. This is a forum for debate. Write a freakin' book! I don't think "Chinese foreign relations with the United States and counter-espionage" should be summed up in a few sentences. It's a complicated topic, much like the other thread that's dominating this section of the forum. The government here looks stupid, incompetent even, along with the military for their inability to figure out who to blame. No, it's not like that at all. You asked why is it a big deal. The Chinese collecting sensitive, military info says it all. It absolutely answers your question. You don't have to go on a long spiel, in some cases, when a few words do the trick. If you're asking me why China did it? Well, that's a ridiculous question. By the way, if you're enamored with the way Howard Cosell would go on and on, just to hear himself speak, I'm not shocked. It fits. he really loved to massage that ego. Although, he was really good in other ways of broadcasting. Without knowing what the sensitive data is, beyond speculation, it's impossible to know if it's a big deal or not. Clickbait 101. Like I've said now, selective outrage just to be angry isn't my thing. That's why I asked. If it's just electronic signals, like the article suggests, I'm unimpressed. There are layers to military intelligence, far beyond what we are privy to in the public eye. China spies on America every single day, for what it's worth. We spy on them, too. How the game is played. We have much more important things to worry about domestically happening right now. |
|
