I went to the first page and did a Ctrl+f for "war" and then "Russia" and a few other words and got nothing.
EricC85 is not an appeaser, at least not of Russia or China.

---

If you can't explain it in words it's not real.  Videos manipulate in ways that text can not.

Just once, Mikey... just once, it would be nice to see you not try to worm your way out of admitting your ignorance. You keep yourself uninformed, and waste my time asking me to educate you, even though that's not what you want. You just like to argue. You're not good at it. You don't know anything. I should really probably stop entertaining you.

I am ignorant and uninformed of things that professional entertainers made up yesterday.  Ya got me.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Just once, Mikey... just once, it would be nice to see you not try to worm your way out of admitting your ignorance. You keep yourself uninformed, and waste my time asking me to educate you, even though that's not what you want. You just like to argue. You're not good at it. You don't know anything. I should really probably stop entertaining you.

I am ignorant and uninformed of things that professional entertainers made up yesterday.  Ya got me.

Here are facts.

Iran, China and Russia are allies.

Is this an Axis of evil or not? Simple question.

I don't need a diatribe of your crap, just a yes or no.

---

So you found a post and upon reading it again you now see that he's not calling for appeasement.

Then you get wrapped around your own axle where you assume 'the establishment" (who exactly?) would not confront Putin directly?  Who said Haley or Biden or DeSantis would not confront Putin directly? How do they know?

But you would confront him directly?

Trump would? 

Is that what you want?

Be clear about what you want.  Don't just say other people are wrong without saying what you think is right.  You're getting lost refuting things no one said.

The duplicity of cowards is undeniable.

Duplicity? You're the one who called Eric an ignorant appeaser for no reason.

Now when asked to explain yourself you shrink away?  You're the one being a coward.

If you weren't a coward, you would do one of two things.  You would either confront that you're wrong, admit it, or explain why I'm wrong.

Like many here (Winger, sneakers, SC1, FSG), you probably think that politics is just for the LOLs and pro wrestling style promos, and you shrink away when someone wants to get specific and detailed because that's "boring" or "annoying". Or maybe you're more like L2L and you've repeatedly fallen victim to random rabbit hole indoctrination on YouTube and mistake that for informed knowledge.

Note that I have claimed nothing about who is an appeaser, which candidate has better ideas about Russia, or anything on the actual topic.  My mind is actually open on that topic, if you can convince me.

---

I am ignorant and uninformed of things that professional entertainers made up yesterday.  Ya got me.

Here are facts.

Iran, China and Russia are allies.

Is this an Axis of evil or not? Simple question.

I don't need a diatribe of your crap, just a yes or no.

It absolutely is an axis of evil, yes.  Almost everything they cooperate on is designed to hurt us and our allies.  Don't forget North Korea and sometimes Venezuela.  EricC85 probably agrees with me.  What do you think?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

White c-words?
What are you even talking about?
And are you trying to say that EricC85 wants to appease Russia?

I'm not going to use the word and get banned. Don't think dirty and actually watch the clip.

And yes... he clearly said he wanted to appease Russia and China. Please read the first page.

No I said Trump and Biden are trying to appease China and Russia when someone else said Nikki was beating war drums. 

I don't want war, I also know it's coming at some point. Just in how many fronts is the question.

---

The duplicity of cowards is undeniable.

Duplicity? You're the one who called Eric an ignorant appeaser for no reason.

Now when asked to explain yourself you shrink away?  You're the one being a coward.

If you weren't a coward, you would do one of two things.  You would either confront that you're wrong, admit it, or explain why I'm wrong.

Like many here (Winger, sneakers, SC1, FSG), you probably think that politics is just for the LOLs and pro wrestling style promos, and you shrink away when someone wants to get specific and detailed because that's "boring" or "annoying". Or maybe you're more like L2L and you've repeatedly fallen victim to random rabbit hole indoctrination on YouTube and mistake that for informed knowledge.

Note that I have claimed nothing about who is an appeaser, which candidate has better ideas about Russia, or anything on the actual topic.  My mind is actually open on that topic, if you can convince me.

---

Here are facts.

Iran, China and Russia are allies.

Is this an Axis of evil or not? Simple question.

I don't need a diatribe of your crap, just a yes or no.

It absolutely is an axis of evil, yes.  Almost everything they cooperate on is designed to hurt us and our allies.  Don't forget North Korea and sometimes Venezuela.  EricC85 probably agrees with me.  What do you think?

Iran Russia and China are major axis of evil we are going to have to face soon. However my greatest concern is closer to home. 

I watch South and central America and this is where we are most vulnerable. The people are starved from corrupt governments sold out to the cartels. The communist are buying resources faster then they can list them and driving the poor across our border. 

I wish we had a foreign policy of investing, securing and hell even fighting in central and South America like we have in the Middle East over the last few decades. We have all the natural resources ever needed between North central abd South america, similar moral beliefs, common views on trade and so many other areas to build on. A strong American continent is probably our best hope for a rising Asia and Russian conflict. As it stands now when war comes it will come from the south and we're not ready for that.

---

The duplicity of cowards is undeniable.

Duplicity? You're the one who called Eric an ignorant appeaser for no reason.

Now when asked to explain yourself you shrink away?  You're the one being a coward.

If you weren't a coward, you would do one of two things.  You would either confront that you're wrong, admit it, or explain why I'm wrong.

Like many here (Winger, sneakers, SC1, FSG), you probably think that politics is just for the LOLs and pro wrestling style promos, and you shrink away when someone wants to get specific and detailed because that's "boring" or "annoying". Or maybe you're more like L2L and you've repeatedly fallen victim to random rabbit hole indoctrination on YouTube and mistake that for informed knowledge.

Note that I have claimed nothing about who is an appeaser, which candidate has better ideas about Russia, or anything on the actual topic.  My mind is actually open on that topic, if you can convince me.

---

Here are facts.

Iran, China and Russia are allies.

Is this an Axis of evil or not? Simple question.

I don't need a diatribe of your crap, just a yes or no.

It absolutely is an axis of evil, yes.  Almost everything they cooperate on is designed to hurt us and our allies.  Don't forget North Korea and sometimes Venezuela.  EricC85 probably agrees with me.  What do you think?

Those other countries are inconsequential. Meaningless. They can't even feed their people. They would be destroyed in a single day.

Iran, China and Russia are evil. Iran three days.

Russia in two weeks during summer. Most of their people would go western immediately just like they did when the Germans invaded (though the Germans were ordered to kill them as they were inferior in their eyes).

China would be harder. They are very weak individually, they will do whatever their leader says. So they won't capitulate as easily.

Iran is just a propaganda machine and have made their people believe they are strong enough to confront the US. Any European country could easily destroy them in a couple weeks. The US? Four days.

---

I'm not going to use the word and get banned. Don't think dirty and actually watch the clip.

And yes... he clearly said he wanted to appease Russia and China. Please read the first page.

No I said Trump and Biden are trying to appease China and Russia when someone else said Nikki was beating war drums. 

I don't want war, I also know it's coming at some point. Just in how many fronts is the question.

Wow. So you just don't know [BLEEP].

None of you have actually researched military history. It's pretty obvious. So please don't pretend to know

---

Duplicity? You're the one who called Eric an ignorant appeaser for no reason.

Now when asked to explain yourself you shrink away?  You're the one being a coward.

If you weren't a coward, you would do one of two things.  You would either confront that you're wrong, admit it, or explain why I'm wrong.

Like many here (Winger, sneakers, SC1, FSG), you probably think that politics is just for the LOLs and pro wrestling style promos, and you shrink away when someone wants to get specific and detailed because that's "boring" or "annoying". Or maybe you're more like L2L and you've repeatedly fallen victim to random rabbit hole indoctrination on YouTube and mistake that for informed knowledge.

Note that I have claimed nothing about who is an appeaser, which candidate has better ideas about Russia, or anything on the actual topic.  My mind is actually open on that topic, if you can convince me.

---

It absolutely is an axis of evil, yes.  Almost everything they cooperate on is designed to hurt us and our allies.  Don't forget North Korea and sometimes Venezuela.  EricC85 probably agrees with me.  What do you think?

Iran Russia and China are major axis of evil we are going to have to face soon. However my greatest concern is closer to home. 

I watch South and central America and this is where we are most vulnerable. The people are starved from corrupt governments sold out to the cartels. The communist are buying resources faster then they can list them and driving the poor across our border. 

I wish we had a foreign policy of investing, securing and hell even fighting in central and South America like we have in the Middle East over the last few decades. We have all the natural resources ever needed between North central abd South america, similar moral beliefs, common views on trade and so many other areas to build on. A strong American continent is probably our best hope for a rising Asia and Russian conflict. As it stands now when war comes it will come from the south and we're not ready for that.

The communists in the south are a big problem and we need to stand up for what's right down there like you said, but they will never threaten us militarily on their current trajectory.

---

Duplicity? You're the one who called Eric an ignorant appeaser for no reason.

Now when asked to explain yourself you shrink away?  You're the one being a coward.

If you weren't a coward, you would do one of two things.  You would either confront that you're wrong, admit it, or explain why I'm wrong.

Like many here (Winger, sneakers, SC1, FSG), you probably think that politics is just for the LOLs and pro wrestling style promos, and you shrink away when someone wants to get specific and detailed because that's "boring" or "annoying". Or maybe you're more like L2L and you've repeatedly fallen victim to random rabbit hole indoctrination on YouTube and mistake that for informed knowledge.

Note that I have claimed nothing about who is an appeaser, which candidate has better ideas about Russia, or anything on the actual topic.  My mind is actually open on that topic, if you can convince me.

---

It absolutely is an axis of evil, yes.  Almost everything they cooperate on is designed to hurt us and our allies.  Don't forget North Korea and sometimes Venezuela.  EricC85 probably agrees with me.  What do you think?

Those other countries are inconsequential. Meaningless. They can't even feed their people. They would be destroyed in a single day.

Iran, China and Russia are evil. Iran three days.

Russia in two weeks during summer. Most of their people would go western immediately just like they did when the Germans invaded (though the Germans were ordered to kill them as they were inferior in their eyes).

China would be harder. They are very weak individually, they will do whatever their leader says. So they won't capitulate as easily.

Iran is just a propaganda machine and have made their people believe they are strong enough to confront the US. Any European country could easily destroy them in a couple weeks. The US? Four days.

---

No I said Trump and Biden are trying to appease China and Russia when someone else said Nikki was beating war drums. 

I don't want war, I also know it's coming at some point. Just in how many fronts is the question.

Wow. So you just don't know [BLEEP].

None of you have actually researched military history. It's pretty obvious. So please don't pretend to know

You claim to have researched military history? So have I!
Here's what I found: Iraq - 8 years. Afghanistan - 20 years.  Doesn't square well with your estimates like "Iran 3 days."

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

White c-words?
What are you even talking about?
And are you trying to say that EricC85 wants to appease Russia?

I'm not going to use the word and get banned. Don't think dirty and actually watch the clip.

I went ahead and watched the clip.

First of all, you're definitely allowed to name religions here.  Christian. Jew.  Muslim.  You're just not allowed to debate religion here.

Anyhow, as always, Tucker is doing the old Rush Limbaugh trick of finding the stupidest person he can from the other side, and arguing with them as if they represent the entire other side. Most Republican voters in Iowa are in fact whites who identify as Christian. However, the lady on NBC obviously errs when she attempts to blame that race and that religion for Trump, obviously people are more than their race and their religion. Obviously, the panel that NBC assembled is terrified of Trump for reasons that have very little to do with race or religion. Reasons they may have discussed a few minutes before or after Tucker's clip, the world may never know.

If Tucker was more honest, he would have noted that the actual organized white evangelicals who remain in Iowa all supported DeSantis.  White Christianity in Iowa and pretty much anywhere else is no longer organized on any kind of top-down basis. The number of people claiming to be white and Christian hasn't really changed, but fewer of them go to church, and much fewer of them listen to their pastors about who they should vote for.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Haha, her only support was from democrats

https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1747084283687174479

Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

---

I'm not going to use the word and get banned. Don't think dirty and actually watch the clip.

I went ahead and watched the clip.

First of all, you're definitely allowed to name religions here.  Christian. Jew.  Muslim.  You're just not allowed to debate religion here.

Anyhow, as always, Tucker is doing the old Rush Limbaugh trick of finding the stupidest person he can from the other side, and arguing with them as if they represent the entire other side. Most Republican voters in Iowa are in fact whites who identify as Christian. However, the lady on NBC obviously errs when she attempts to blame that race and that religion for Trump, obviously people are more than their race and their religion. Obviously, the panel that NBC assembled is terrified of Trump for reasons that have very little to do with race or religion. Reasons they may have discussed a few minutes before or after Tucker's clip, the world may never know.

If Tucker was more honest, he would have noted that the actual organized white evangelicals who remain in Iowa all supported DeSantis.  White Christianity in Iowa and pretty much anywhere else is no longer organized on any kind of top-down basis. The number of people claiming to be white and Christian hasn't really changed, but fewer of them go to church, and much fewer of them listen to their pastors about who they should vote for.

How long did it take us to overrun Iraq? Three days?

Iraq was stronger than Iran is now.

EDIT: Weird.. it quoted the wrong post

---

Haha, her only support was from democrats

https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1747084283687174479

Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

Can't wait to see who she throws her support behind when she has to drop out lol

---

I went ahead and watched the clip.

First of all, you're definitely allowed to name religions here.  Christian. Jew.  Muslim.  You're just not allowed to debate religion here.

Anyhow, as always, Tucker is doing the old Rush Limbaugh trick of finding the stupidest person he can from the other side, and arguing with them as if they represent the entire other side. Most Republican voters in Iowa are in fact whites who identify as Christian. However, the lady on NBC obviously errs when she attempts to blame that race and that religion for Trump, obviously people are more than their race and their religion. Obviously, the panel that NBC assembled is terrified of Trump for reasons that have very little to do with race or religion. Reasons they may have discussed a few minutes before or after Tucker's clip, the world may never know.

If Tucker was more honest, he would have noted that the actual organized white evangelicals who remain in Iowa all supported DeSantis.  White Christianity in Iowa and pretty much anywhere else is no longer organized on any kind of top-down basis. The number of people claiming to be white and Christian hasn't really changed, but fewer of them go to church, and much fewer of them listen to their pastors about who they should vote for.

How long did it take us to overrun Iraq? Three days?

Iraq was stronger than Iran is now.

EDIT: Weird.. it quoted the wrong post

Yeah but then we were stuck there for more than 8 years.  Why would you want another one of those?

Besides, I'm pretty sure Iran is a much tougher nut to crack that Iraq. The people are less divided, there are more of them, and the terrain is much tougher.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

You get what you deserve republicans. I don't want any crying about stolen elections, I don't want any [BLEEP] about unfair prosecution, no more talk of morality maters, this is your king you've chosen him now lay in the bed you are making. 

Republicans know he's under indictment and yet still nominate him. 

Republicans know he has said he wants to be a dictator day one and yet still nominate him. 

Republicans have been made painfully aware of his immorality and yet still nominate him. 

Republicans saw first hand Trump's lust for centralized power during COVID and yet still nominate him.

You can't blame the Democrats, the liberals, the media, the progressives, or anyone else when this [BLEEP] blows up in all our faces. 

Thank you republicans your giving us Biden vs Trump round two, what happened to this party? 

What a mess, thanks republicans.

We need another Ronald Reagan. I dont see one anywhere on the horizon.

---

"Remember Red, Hope is a good thing. Maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies."  - Andy Dufresne, The Shawshank Redemption

How long did it take us to overrun Iraq? Three days?

Iraq was stronger than Iran is now.

EDIT: Weird.. it quoted the wrong post

Yeah but then we were stuck there for more than 8 years.  Why would you want another one of those?

Besides, I'm pretty sure Iran is a much tougher nut to crack that Iraq.  The people are less divided, there are more of them, and the terrain is much tougher.

Iran has a more professional military. However, I don't know how motivated their soldiers would be considering the rank and file come mostly from the younger populace who aren't entirely thrilled living under the thumb of a theocracy, but their sense of patriotism may override that. Persians are very proud people, arrogantly so. In addition, they engaged our troops regularly in Afghanistan with semi-covert units. They killed quite a few Americans there and are familiar with our tactics and weapons. A retired Army Ranger told me of Iranian and U.S. Army squads regularly watching each other. They were always looking for an opportunity for longer range engagements and setting up IEDs, and it wasn't uncommon to find weapons and ammunition with Persian labeling. 

Iran would definitely be a tougher nut to crack.

---

Yeah but then we were stuck there for more than 8 years.  Why would you want another one of those?

Besides, I'm pretty sure Iran is a much tougher nut to crack that Iraq.  The people are less divided, there are more of them, and the terrain is much tougher.

Iran has a more professional military. However, I don't know how motivated their soldiers would be considering the rank and file come mostly from the younger populace who aren't entirely thrilled living under the thumb of a theocracy, but their sense of patriotism may override that. Persians are very proud people, arrogantly so. In addition, they engaged our troops regularly in Afghanistan with semi-covert units. They killed quite a few Americans there and are familiar with our tactics and weapons. A retired Army Ranger told me of Iranian and U.S. Army squads regularly watching each other. They were always looking for an opportunity for longer range engagements and setting up IEDs, and it wasn't uncommon to find weapons and ammunition with Persian labeling. 

Iran would definitely be a tougher nut to crack.

Iran was in a stalemate with Iraq for ten years.

Arabs don't know how to fight these kinds of wars.

They don't understand the idea of the blitzkrieg which is exactly what the US would do.

All their tactics are based on defensive fighting. Digging their tanks in. Ours are all about quick deployments and flanking.

They wouldn't stand a chance.

---

Iran has a more professional military. However, I don't know how motivated their soldiers would be considering the rank and file come mostly from the younger populace who aren't entirely thrilled living under the thumb of a theocracy, but their sense of patriotism may override that. Persians are very proud people, arrogantly so. In addition, they engaged our troops regularly in Afghanistan with semi-covert units. They killed quite a few Americans there and are familiar with our tactics and weapons. A retired Army Ranger told me of Iranian and U.S. Army squads regularly watching each other. They were always looking for an opportunity for longer range engagements and setting up IEDs, and it wasn't uncommon to find weapons and ammunition with Persian labeling. 

Iran would definitely be a tougher nut to crack.

Iran was in a stalemate with Iraq for ten years.

Arabs don't know how to fight these kinds of wars.

They don't understand the idea of the blitzkrieg which is exactly what the US would do

Oh neato

Someone is going to tell hb stuff about military tactics

---

Iran has a more professional military. However, I don't know how motivated their soldiers would be considering the rank and file come mostly from the younger populace who aren't entirely thrilled living under the thumb of a theocracy, but their sense of patriotism may override that. Persians are very proud people, arrogantly so. In addition, they engaged our troops regularly in Afghanistan with semi-covert units. They killed quite a few Americans there and are familiar with our tactics and weapons. A retired Army Ranger told me of Iranian and U.S. Army squads regularly watching each other. They were always looking for an opportunity for longer range engagements and setting up IEDs, and it wasn't uncommon to find weapons and ammunition with Persian labeling. 

Iran would definitely be a tougher nut to crack.

Iran was in a stalemate with Iraq for ten years.

Arabs don't know how to fight these kinds of wars.

They don't understand the idea of the blitzkrieg which is exactly what the US would do.

All their tactics are based on defensive fighting. Digging their tanks in. Ours are all about quick deployments and flanking.

They wouldn't stand a chance.

That was a far different time for both countries. The Shah, who was obscenely corrupt and an American ally, had just been overthrown by the religious right and a theocracy installed. Iran had no friends and little resources while Iraq had Saudi Arabia, the U.S. to an extent, and other backers with deep pockets. The U.S. and Russia were using the Middle East as a chess board in those days, so the money and arms flowed to all sorts of shady characters and causes. And wouldn't you know it, Saddam Hussein was not our sworn enemy then. 

We don't want to get tied down in Iran. It would be another protracted conflict with no resolution. 

Btw, Persians take umbrage at being called Arab.

---

Iran has a more professional military. However, I don't know how motivated their soldiers would be considering the rank and file come mostly from the younger populace who aren't entirely thrilled living under the thumb of a theocracy, but their sense of patriotism may override that. Persians are very proud people, arrogantly so. In addition, they engaged our troops regularly in Afghanistan with semi-covert units. They killed quite a few Americans there and are familiar with our tactics and weapons. A retired Army Ranger told me of Iranian and U.S. Army squads regularly watching each other. They were always looking for an opportunity for longer range engagements and setting up IEDs, and it wasn't uncommon to find weapons and ammunition with Persian labeling. 

Iran would definitely be a tougher nut to crack.

Iran was in a stalemate with Iraq for ten years.

Arabs don't know how to fight these kinds of wars.

They don't understand the idea of the blitzkrieg which is exactly what the US would do.

All their tactics are based on defensive fighting. Digging their tanks in. Ours are all about quick deployments and flanking.

They wouldn't stand a chance.

Who's gonna tell him?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Hey all. Dint usually venture down here but just wanted to ask a question. What's the actual thoughts and support for Trump like this time around? The only thing we really get over here is all the court cases and shady things he has done. 

I know he seemed like a breath of fresh air the first time but after that first term and the whole rigged election stuff, just don't know what the actual feelings are about him by regular people like you guys (well some of you  )

---

Hey all. Dint usually venture down here but just wanted to ask a question. What's the actual thoughts and support for Trump like this time around? The only thing we really get over here is all the court cases and shady things he has done. 

I know he seemed like a breath of fresh air the first time but after that first term and the whole rigged election stuff, just don't know what the actual feelings are about him by regular people like you guys (well some of you  )

He's the most divisive figure in American politics in my lifetime. 

A strong percentage of conservatives love him. A smaller percentage of conservatives hold their nose and support him hoping his policy will swing most toward their ideology. A smaller still percentage of conservatives just can't stomach a grifting-raping-con-artist-insurrectionest-criminal as a viable candidate. 

Liberal/progressive leaning Americans came out of the woodwork to register and vote in record numbers to keep him out of office in the last election. Remains to be seen if they can do that again. I suspect they will. 

You've also got the female conservative vote that will split on him to some degree due to his view of women in general as well as reproductive rights. Maybe 10-15% of them will praise him in public and quietly vote against him at the polls. 
(In 2020 - women outvoted men and 57% of them voted against Trump)

90% of black voters despise him passionately.
Latin voters are split because of hard line immigration policy vs his anti-abortion stance resonating with a largely catholic community.

---