PDA

View Full Version : What Could Possibly Go Wrong?



llotter
09-30-2012, 05:21 AM
So, we are now giving our drones to the people currently in charge in Yemen, which had been restricted to our Western allies.

Soflasnapper
09-30-2012, 11:21 AM
I agree with your implication. I don't think this is a good idea at all, even without knowing the details.

Still I think it will be a problem limited in scope to the Yemenis. I imagine that we will maintain kill switches or takeover software if things go bad.

It's reminiscent of Reagan's giving Stingers to the Muhajadeen, of which some 100,000 remain at large still to this day. Those are wholly portable, and eventually, may show up in the downing of a commercial airliner (although they haven't now for some decades).

Bad overall strategies lead to bad tactics in support of them.

eg8r
09-30-2012, 12:14 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I agree with your implication. I don't think this is a good idea at all, even without knowing the details.

Still I think it will be a problem limited in scope to the Yemenis. I imagine that we will maintain kill switches or takeover software if things go bad.

It's reminiscent of Reagan's giving Stingers to the Muhajadeen</div></div>Or Obama giving guns to Mexican drug lords. Always a bad idea no matter who is doing it.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
09-30-2012, 01:29 PM
No, you haven't provided a comparable example at all.

Guns to Mexican druglords is no escalation in kind, or even degree. They already have gotten double per week on average, every week for years, what supposedly went there under F&F. To be clear, about 5,000 US weapons went there every week, for YEARS, quite apart from the 2,000 alleged to have been allowed to walk. 5,000 a week x 52 weeks a year = over 250,000 a year, x many years. 2k new weapons move that needle not at all.

Differing from the entirely NEW provision of either Stingers (which the Mujahadeen lacked, and therefore were being destroyed by the Soviet helicopter gunships), or the drones to Yemeni governmental control.

llotter
09-30-2012, 04:13 PM
100,000 seems a bit excessive, especially when only a 1000 were given in the first place and it is estimated that only 50 are left unaccounted for.

Beyond that, there was little reason at the time to distrust the Afghans 'freedom fighters' back in the '80s, unlike the cauldron of anti-American hate that has spread throughout the Middle East now.

I suppose there is a natural desire to try to compare The Moron with a great president like Reagan but the attempt only displays how detached from reality you lefties are.
.

Soflasnapper
09-30-2012, 04:37 PM
Right you are, and thanks for the correction. I haven't looked at that info in many many years, and may have misremembered the PRICE we tried to buy them back at ($100,000) for the amount, which was a ridiculous error, on simple order of magnitude analysis grounds.

The reason to distrust the muhajadeen is that they were stone cold religious fanatics, who obviously hated the west as infidels nearly as much as they hated Communist USSR, and who could very reliably be predicted to oppose us when their local focus on the USSR occupiers was done.

Even the far smaller number were a big problem.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Stingers inevitably turned up for sale on the international black market. Alan Kuperman, author of a history of the Stinger transfer published in 1999 in Political Science Quarterly, puts the United Arab Emirates, Somalia, Iraq, Qatar, Zambia, and North Korea among the nations to acquire the Stinger. They are also believed to be in the arsenal of anti-government guerrillas in Turkey and Sri Lanka, as well as Hezbollah guerrillas operating in Lebanon. In 1990, two Colombian drug dealers were arrested in Tampa, Fla., after attempting to arrange the purchase of Stingers for the Medellín Cartel. The following year, U.S. Customs agents in Miami arrested four men and charged them with attempting to smuggle Stingers and other weapons to Yugoslavia.

In the early '90s, Stingers were used in a flurry of attacks against military and possibly civilian aircraft. The Russian press reported that Islamic rebels used a Stinger to shoot down an Su-25 fighter-bomber over Tajikistan, and a U.N. investigation fingered the U.S.-made missile in an attack that brought down an Italian supply plane. In 1993, Muslim separatists shot down a Georgian airliner, killing dozens of passengers aboard. Investigators never determined what type of missile was used, but shortly before the attack took place, separatist leaders had coyly hinted to reporters that they were the proud owners of a few Stingers.

To stem the damage, the CIA sought to buy back its missing Afghan Stingers. The agency allocated $65 million for the program—about twice the cost of the original 1,000 sent to the mujahideen—which commenced in 1993 and relied upon the help and cooperation of Pakistani intelligence.

[...]

Errant Stingers are still with us. [this article dates from 2001] In 1999, the Indian government claimed that Muslim rebels in Kashmir used a Stinger to down a military helicopter, killing all five soldiers on board. One defendant testified in the trial earlier this year of the men who bombed American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that he'd been commissioned to buy a plane for Osama Bin Laden in the mid-'90s. By his account, Bin Laden planned to use the plane to ship Stingers from Afghanistan to Sudan. And just weeks before Sept. 11, several Taliban soldiers carried Stingers on their shoulders during a military parade in Kabul.

During the past few decades, a variety of surface-to-air missiles—several may have been Stingers—have been used to shoot down 24 civilian aircraft, killing a total of almost 600 people. "After twenty years of reported instances of SAMs in the hands of rebel militias, narco-criminals, and terrorist groups, the potential for increased threats to civil aircraft has become a serious reality," says a Clinton-era report from the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security. "Fanatical elements [are] not deterred by the potential implications of mass casualties that could occur if a man-portable SAM were used against a commercial airliner."

Some say the military threat posed by the Stingers is overblown. In the past few weeks, a variety of military and intelligence sources have been quoted in the press as saying that the Stinger's battery packs are good for only four or five years, and hence any owned by the Taliban would be useless against an American-led military action in Afghanistan. However, a declassified Pentagon document obtained by Kuperman states that the battery packs have "a shelf life of at least 10 years, with a reliability rate of 98-99%." </div></div>

Spare me the notion that Reagan as a great president (allegedly) means he didn't make mistakes. This may have been one of them. If not, and on balance this was the right decision (since it neutralized the Soviet Hind gunship helos, and helped force the Soviet withdrawal over time), it still had a significant downside/blowback, that we need not minimize to protect the late president's reputation with eyewash.

I doubt the drones will have potential for proliferation, which is the point I was making.

hondo
09-30-2012, 04:43 PM
Ah, if only Larry would admit when he has made a mistake once in a while, I might see him as an honorable man.
Hasn't happened once in all the years I have seen him post.
Even if he can produce one or two examples over the past 8 years I will remain un-impressed. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif

Soflasnapper
09-30-2012, 04:47 PM
I've gotten a begrudging 'technically that may be right' once or twice, coupled with an insistence that it was basically wrong anyway.

Soflasnapper
09-30-2012, 04:48 PM
I'll point out I got the 'thousand' part right!!! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

eg8r
09-30-2012, 06:58 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, you haven't provided a comparable example at all.</div></div>LOL, surely you wouldn't agree. You have been told to never agree with anything that shows Obama not in a positive light. Don't worry though, we know you now.

eg8r

llotter
09-30-2012, 08:33 PM
It is dishonest to say that I believe the Great Reagan didn't make any mistakes based on anything I have said, a total straw man. Of course he made mistakes, some even major, IMO. The Social Security compromise, amnesty, tax increases are examples that come to mind and I'm sure there were others.

hondo
09-30-2012, 09:16 PM
"we know you now"

ROTFLMFAO! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

"we" = Ed, Larry, and lotter. NYUK, NYUK! WHOOP!

hondo
09-30-2012, 09:23 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: llotter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is dishonest to say that I believe the Great Reagan didn't make any mistakes based on anything I have said, a total straw man. Of course he made mistakes, some even major, IMO. The Social Security compromise, amnesty, tax increases are examples that come to mind and I'm sure there were others.

</div></div>

In cahoots with Big Business letting massive business interests go over seas. Busting the unions. Doing everything to destroy the middle class.
Those are just a few of the "other" major mistakes that the "Great Reagan" made.
Ronnie and George Sr were the beginning of the destruction of our great country and Jr and Cheney finished the job.
And now Mitt wants to bring us back? To what?

eg8r
09-30-2012, 09:55 PM
As long as "we" doesn't include honduh it is a good day. Oh yeah, good to see you keeping in character and having nothing to say about the subject.

eg8r

hondo
09-30-2012, 10:09 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As long as "we" doesn't include honduh it is a good day. Oh yeah, good to see you keeping in character and having nothing to say about the subject.

eg8r </div></div>


1 Corinthians 13

New International Version (NIV)


13 If I speak in the tongues[a] of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast,[b] but do not have love, I gain nothing.

4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

hondo
09-30-2012, 10:13 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As long as "we" doesn't include honduh it is a good day. Oh yeah, good to see you keeping in character and having nothing to say about the subject.

eg8r </div></div>


Hebrews 13

New International Version (NIV)




13 Keep on loving one another as brothers and sisters. 2 Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it.

LWW
10-01-2012, 03:49 AM
The left is again confusing the mujahideen with the taliban while ignoring that Carter got us into Afghanistan and gave Iran to the mullahs.

hondo
10-01-2012, 06:57 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The left is again confusing the mujahideen with the taliban while ignoring that Carter got us into Afghanistan and gave Iran to the mullahs. </div></div>

Hebrews 13

New International Version (NIV)




13 Keep on loving one another as brothers and sisters.

Gayle in MD
10-01-2012, 09:16 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: llotter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is dishonest to say that I believe the Great Reagan didn't make any mistakes based on anything I have said, a total straw man. Of course he made mistakes, some even major, IMO. The Social Security compromise, amnesty, tax increases are examples that come to mind and I'm sure there were others.

</div></div>

In cahoots with Big Business letting massive business interests go over seas. Busting the unions. Doing everything to destroy the middle class.
Those are just a few of the "other" major mistakes that the "Great Reagan" made.
Ronnie and George Sr were the beginning of the destruction of our great country and Jr and Cheney finished the job.
And now Mitt wants to bring us back? To what? </div></div>

Excellent post, Hondo.

Totally true!

G.

Soflasnapper
10-01-2012, 09:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, you haven't provided a comparable example at all.</div></div>LOL, surely you wouldn't agree. You have been told to never agree with anything that shows Obama not in a positive light. Don't worry though, we know you now.

eg8r </div></div>

No one has told me what to say about anything. Have you been told what to write? Or why would you claim that of me?

I've been critical of Obama in several respects. I've described him and the mainstream Democratic Party as fascism light. Is that a compliment in your mind, or a criticism?

In what respect is a relative handful of the lowest tech weapons compared to the years of flow of arms exceeding it by 50-fold a year comparable to supplying new arms or weapons, not previously in the hands of those we supplied, of extreme lethal utility?

The first provided no new capability or weapons types, and the other two newly provided surface to air Stingers and in the last case, predator drones, very capable weapons that changed the game, and which had obvious large proliferation issues. I already showed how much the Stingers got sent around the world to terrorist organizations and were used in downing aircraft.

Gayle in MD
10-01-2012, 09:30 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Right you are, and thanks for the correction. I haven't looked at that info in many many years, and may have misremembered the PRICE we tried to buy them back at ($100,000) for the amount, which was a ridiculous error, on simple order of magnitude analysis grounds.

The reason to distrust the muhajadeen is that they were stone cold religious fanatics, who obviously hated the west as infidels nearly as much as they hated Communist USSR, and who could very reliably be predicted to oppose us when their local focus on the USSR occupiers was done.

Even the far smaller number were a big problem.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Stingers inevitably turned up for sale on the international black market. Alan Kuperman, author of a history of the Stinger transfer published in 1999 in Political Science Quarterly, puts the United Arab Emirates, Somalia, Iraq, Qatar, Zambia, and North Korea among the nations to acquire the Stinger. They are also believed to be in the arsenal of anti-government guerrillas in Turkey and Sri Lanka, as well as Hezbollah guerrillas operating in Lebanon. In 1990, two Colombian drug dealers were arrested in Tampa, Fla., after attempting to arrange the purchase of Stingers for the Medellín Cartel. The following year, U.S. Customs agents in Miami arrested four men and charged them with attempting to smuggle Stingers and other weapons to Yugoslavia.

In the early '90s, Stingers were used in a flurry of attacks against military and possibly civilian aircraft. The Russian press reported that Islamic rebels used a Stinger to shoot down an Su-25 fighter-bomber over Tajikistan, and a U.N. investigation fingered the U.S.-made missile in an attack that brought down an Italian supply plane. In 1993, Muslim separatists shot down a Georgian airliner, killing dozens of passengers aboard. Investigators never determined what type of missile was used, but shortly before the attack took place, separatist leaders had coyly hinted to reporters that they were the proud owners of a few Stingers.

To stem the damage, the CIA sought to buy back its missing Afghan Stingers. The agency allocated $65 million for the program—about twice the cost of the original 1,000 sent to the mujahideen—which commenced in 1993 and relied upon the help and cooperation of Pakistani intelligence.

[...]

Errant Stingers are still with us. [this article dates from 2001] In 1999, the Indian government claimed that Muslim rebels in Kashmir used a Stinger to down a military helicopter, killing all five soldiers on board. One defendant testified in the trial earlier this year of the men who bombed American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that he'd been commissioned to buy a plane for Osama Bin Laden in the mid-'90s. By his account, Bin Laden planned to use the plane to ship Stingers from Afghanistan to Sudan. And just weeks before Sept. 11, several Taliban soldiers carried Stingers on their shoulders during a military parade in Kabul.

During the past few decades, a variety of surface-to-air missiles—several may have been Stingers—have been used to shoot down 24 civilian aircraft, killing a total of almost 600 people. "After twenty years of reported instances of SAMs in the hands of rebel militias, narco-criminals, and terrorist groups, the potential for increased threats to civil aircraft has become a serious reality," says a Clinton-era report from the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security. "Fanatical elements [are] not deterred by the potential implications of mass casualties that could occur if a man-portable SAM were used against a commercial airliner."

Some say the military threat posed by the Stingers is overblown. In the past few weeks, a variety of military and intelligence sources have been quoted in the press as saying that the Stinger's battery packs are good for only four or five years, and hence any owned by the Taliban would be useless against an American-led military action in Afghanistan. However, a declassified Pentagon document obtained by Kuperman states that the battery packs have "a shelf life of at least 10 years, with a reliability rate of 98-99%." </div></div>

Spare me the notion that Reagan as a great president (allegedly) means he didn't make mistakes. This may have been one of them. If not, and on balance this was the right decision (since it neutralized the Soviet Hind gunship helos, and helped force the Soviet withdrawal over time), it still had a significant downside/blowback, that we need not minimize to protect the late president's reputation with eyewash.

I doubt the drones will have potential for proliferation, which is the point I was making. </div></div>

The right continues to skew the history of our involvement in Afghanistan.

http://www.ask.com/wiki/Afghanistan%E2%80%93United_States_relations

hondo
10-01-2012, 12:26 PM
Thank you, Gayle. To which Larry and Eg answer by saying I never respond to the topic. Gets tiresome trying to have a conversation WITH CURLY AND SHEMP.

And, yes, guys, I know that bordered on a personal attack. I'm sorry. You guys just wear me out.

Soflasnapper
10-01-2012, 01:09 PM
What about MOE???!??!!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

eg8r
10-01-2012, 01:49 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thank you, Gayle. To which Larry and Eg answer by saying I never respond to the topic.</div></div>LOL, so here we are 3 or so weeks after you started your little jihad I have asked you many times to take your last 100 posts and count how many of them had anything to do with the subject of thread. You snuck back in your hole knowing I was correct and that you never contributed to the subject. Now, all of a sudden you have decided to join the discussions instead of being a troll and you think that all of a sudden negates your previous activity. It doesn't work that way.

eg8r

Qtec
10-01-2012, 06:33 PM
When ever did the USA give a rats a$$ about foreigners being killed?

Can you imagine Pakistan flying drones over the USA?

Q

eg8r
10-01-2012, 07:20 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When ever did the USA give a rats a$$ about foreigners being killed?</div></div>Boy isn't that the truth. The media here never even talks about the 300+ Mexicans killed from Obama's gun running.

eg8r

Qtec
10-01-2012, 07:26 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When ever did the USA give a rats a$$ about foreigners being killed?</div></div>Boy isn't that the truth. The media here never even talks about the 300+ Mexicans killed from Obama's gun running.

eg8r </div></div>

Again you show your ignorance. 300 is a spot in the ocean.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Mexico's drug wars – death toll calculations ignore such phenomena as gangs retrieving their dead or dissolving victims in caustic soda. Photograph: Reuters

The death toll in Mexico's drug wars is a matter of intense controversy. The government released almost no official numbers until it published a database of all "deaths because of criminal rivalry" up to the end of 2010. These totalled 34,612, considerably more than the unofficial counts kept by several newspapers.

The government reneged on its promise to regularly update the database, although regional official figures are sometimes available.

One way of estimating the current total is by adding the official 2010 figure to this year's newspaper counts, making 46,000. Political scientist Eduardo Guerrero maintains his own count based on monitoring the press and factoring in estimated under-reporting to reach 47,500 by the end of October.

Some journalists and activists argue that the official criteria defining drug war deaths are too narrow and the real death toll is much higher.

The Tijuana-based magazine Zeta studied publicly available figures for all homicides. It identified classifications it said should be included to produce a figure of 50,490 until the end of July. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>This would suggest the current figure is approaching 60,000</span></div></div>

Almost all the guns come from your country.

Q

eg8r
10-01-2012, 08:46 PM
Any chance you had any examples of the deaths from the FF guns that Obama gave them? I know it sure never makes any major news other than when we talk about our own guy that was killed with Obama's guns.

eg8r

hondo
10-01-2012, 09:26 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thank you, Gayle. To which Larry and Eg answer by saying I never respond to the topic.</div></div>LOL, so here we are 3 or so weeks after you started your little jihad I have asked you many times to take your last 100 posts and count how many of them had anything to do with the subject of thread. You snuck back in your hole knowing I was correct and that you never contributed to the subject. Now, all of a sudden you have decided to join the discussions instead of being a troll and you think that all of a sudden negates your previous activity. It doesn't work that way.

eg8r </div></div>

Despite your hypocritical shadowposting I will answer.
I rarely join in the discussion because of Larry and your dis-honest answers.
My little "Jihad" was simply to try and get you to take a look at your behavior and stop calling people names.
I failed because you are of very limited intellect and find it easier to resort to name-calling than defending your position.
Your hero Larry Wilson is of the same ilk.
If you don't like my posts simply put me on ignore or at least stop shadowposting me.

eg8r
10-02-2012, 09:46 AM
If I don't like your posts I will simply tell you.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-02-2012, 12:02 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Any chance you had any examples of the deaths from the FF guns that Obama gave them? I know it sure never makes any major news other than when we talk about our own guy that was killed with Obama's guns.

eg8r </div></div>

Actually there is no proof that the poor dead border agent was killed by F&F guns. F&F guns were found at the scene, but if you read any original reports closely, nobody has shown evidence that any were used as the death weapon. If you find some stating that as a fact, they are making an assumption not borne out by any evidence at all, iirc.

Isn't that a surprise to you?

eg8r
10-02-2012, 01:45 PM
LOL, you crack me up. In a few days you will us there was never any proof of Obama's guns over there.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-03-2012, 09:11 AM
Really? Although I just wrote: 'F&F guns were found at the scene'?

Yes, of course they were FOUND AT THE SCENE. None was shown to be the murder weapon. That's a simple fact, isn't it? Or don't you know? Care to find out, or is scoffing your sole 'rebuttal'?

eg8r
10-03-2012, 09:25 AM
LOL, yes you said the guns were there but were not used when the guy was killed. Next you will be telling us they never were there. All those smarts and you cannot follow a simple conversation.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-03-2012, 11:50 AM
Hardly. I'm disputing your unsupported counter-factual prediction.

While reminding you of the key fact you evidently got wrong because you read spinners and not truth tellers.

Nobody has credibly shown any of those weapons were used, or even fired (without resulting in fatalities) recently at that time. I don't think there was any showing that any of the F&F weapons found at the death scene even had ammunition in them, although it wouldn't surprise me (or prove one was the murder weapon) if they did.

They very well may have been in shipping cases, unloaded, for all I've seen on the subject.

eg8r
10-03-2012, 01:26 PM
LOL, you are right. This entire fiasco was really about nothing. No one died and we unloaded a bunch of guns, to a bunch of killers, that we never really wanted anyways.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-03-2012, 01:42 PM
An exaggeration that no one has claimed, certainly not anything I said.

But far closer to the truth than the other extreme theory and position, that although probably a million or more US weapons have gone down there and have provably been used in killing a lot of persons, it was the DOJ plan to run a very small fraction of that number so that when THOSE got used to kill some people in Mexico, it would provide an excuse for gun control in the US.

To repeat, although that was ALREADY HAPPENING and resulting in 10s of thousands of deaths in Mexico, somehow putting what is a tiny number extra would somehow gain traction among US citizens to prompt severe gun sale controls in this country.

And the PROOF? One dead border patrol agent who was NOT shown to be killed by any of those weapons.

Which makes total sense to you?

eg8r
10-03-2012, 08:23 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">An exaggeration that no one has claimed, certainly not anything I said.</div></div>Sure it is an exaggeration. I find your defense laughable and am joining in on the fun.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-04-2012, 09:48 AM
Which kind of extra sensory perception do you use to gain your alleged knowledge that the border patrol agent was slain by one of those weapons found there? Wouldn't the user of the weapon used take it with him?

Do you claim the only guns anyone had down there were the ones walked? Weren't there actually hundreds of thousands of other weapons already there from the prior years of gun running?

eg8r
10-04-2012, 12:28 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Which kind of extra sensory perception do you use to gain your alleged knowledge that the border patrol agent was slain by one of those weapons found there?</div></div>It is called common sense. Don't worry though you have proven you don't have this.

eg8r

hondo
10-04-2012, 04:43 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Which kind of extra sensory perception do you use to gain your alleged knowledge that the border patrol agent was slain by one of those weapons found there?</div></div>It is called common sense. Don't worry though you have proven you don't have this.

eg8r </div></div>

Exhibit 183.

eg8r
10-04-2012, 06:56 PM
Quit hypocritically shadowposting.

eg8r

hondo
10-21-2012, 01:14 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Which kind of extra sensory perception do you use to gain your alleged knowledge that the border patrol agent was slain by one of those weapons found there?</div></div>It is called common sense. Don't worry though you have proven you don't have this.

eg8r </div></div>

Exhibit 183. </div></div>

Bump