On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 21:21:14 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 20:59:19 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 10/27/18 8:51 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 19:11:37 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 10/27/18 12:36 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 07:20:31 -0400, John H.
wrote:

In her position, given the wishy-washy approach by our President,
I'd do the same thing:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45989356

I am really not sure what we were supposed to do. I guess we could
tell them not to sell Europe any more oil. Putin would like that.



Gee, what's the point of wasting a trillion dollars a year on the
military (or close to a trillion) when we don't have the wherewithal to
give the Saudis a smack upside the head for something like this? I
mean, what would disgruntled Saudis do, crash airplanes into the new WTC?

Are you really suggesting we start another no win war in the middle
east?


Not at all. I'm merely wondering why we blow so much money on the
military when we don't the wherewithal to give the Saudis a smack upside
the head.

They call that an act of war.


So, we can’t use it and they know we can’t use, except on third world
countries in Africa and Asia and countries with no government at all. Do we
need to spend a trillion on that?

I don't think we need to spend nearly as much as we do but it is a
jobs program.

On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 19:11:37 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/27/18 12:36 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 07:20:31 -0400, John H.
wrote:

In her position, given the wishy-washy approach by our President, I'd do the same thing:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45989356

I am really not sure what we were supposed to do. I guess we could
tell them not to sell Europe any more oil. Putin would like that.



Gee, what's the point of wasting a trillion dollars a year on the
military (or close to a trillion) when we don't have the wherewithal to
give the Saudis a smack upside the head for something like this? I
mean, what would disgruntled Saudis do, crash airplanes into the new WTC?

Brilliant, Krause.

John H. Wrote in message:
On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 19:11:37 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:On 10/27/18 12:36 PM, wrote: On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 07:20:31 -0400, John H. wrote: In her position, given the wishy-washy approach by our President, I'd do the same thing: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45989356 I am really not sure what we were supposed to do. I guess we could tell them not to sell Europe any more oil. Putin would like that. Gee, what's the point of wasting a trillion dollars a year on the military (or close to a trillion) when we don't have the wherewithal to give the Saudis a smack upside the head for something like this? I mean, what would disgruntled Saudis do, crash airplanes into the new WTC?Brilliant, Krause.

Two words we seldom see in the same phrase. It makes more sense
if you include "not".
Not Krause, brilliant
Krause, not brilliant
Krause brilliant, not

See what I mean?

--
x

On Sun, 28 Oct 2018 09:09:37 -0400 (EDT), justan wrote:

John H. Wrote in message:
On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 19:11:37 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:On 10/27/18 12:36 PM, wrote: On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 07:20:31 -0400, John H. wrote: In her position, given the wishy-washy approach by our President, I'd do the same thing: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45989356 I am really not sure what we were supposed to do. I guess we could tell them not to sell Europe any more oil. Putin would like that. Gee, what's the point of wasting a trillion dollars a year on the military (or close to a trillion) when we don't have the wherewithal to give the Saudis a smack upside the head for something like this? I mean, what would disgruntled Saudis do, crash airplanes into the new WTC?Brilliant, Krause.

Two words we seldom see in the same phrase. It makes more sense
if you include "not".
Not Krause, brilliant
Krause, not brilliant
Krause brilliant, not

See what I mean?

Point well made, but I was just testing his aptitude (Donnie's word) for discerning sarcasm.