BS: Has the US shot its bolt?

Subject: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 05 Jan 14 - 11:29 AM

Or just come to its senses?

US troops will not take on Al Qaeda

Only Teribus can save us now.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 05 Jan 14 - 01:45 PM

The continuing conflict is between Sunni and Shia; Al Qaeda will support the Sunnis (for the time being) because the Iraqi government is Shia dominated, set up by the U.S. A. Qs. best bet for war and confusion to U.S. plans is to support the Sunnis.

"More fun, more people killed."

Iraq with three major players is an impossibility as a country.

The Iraq was was stupid from the start, a Bush miscalculation and the UK went along, bringing in the UN.

An unholy mess.

(O Terribus, where art thou?)

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Jan 14 - 01:47 PM

One- After all those frustrating years IN Iraq, Kerry and the US would have to exhibit a real LACK of sense to go back with troops.

Two- Can you explicate exactly what the phrase "shot its bolt" implies in this context. I get 2-3 slightly different possible 'translations' running through my head... from 'used up all its options' to 'lost its nerve' to 'worn out its welcome'....

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 05 Jan 14 - 02:36 PM

I would also ask for a clarif on "take on" - but I'll try not to get started on that.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Jan 14 - 05:48 PM

The USA certainly has shot plenty of bolts and have plenty left. The trick is knowing when to keep the bolt in its quiver.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jan 14 - 06:35 PM

Well, its kinda like Veet-Nahm all over again.

When will they ever learn.........

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Jan 14 - 07:57 PM

If things had gone slightly differently earlier this year I can imagine the Americans being involved in supporting the same people in Syria and fighting them in Iraq...

Life is strange. (Mind I think it's quite likely that that is actually happening on the quiet anyway.)

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: GUEST,Musket wading in
Date: 06 Jan 14 - 05:04 AM

Satellite technology is advancing. Soon, we will be able to successfully use topographical data to determine where the oil reserves are.

That may help clear the fog over why you fight or defend the same people in different geographical areas.

Just think, if Texas had gone it alone a hundred years ago, we'd have UN peacekeepers in there now.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Jan 14 - 06:06 AM

I hadn't realised there were moves for Texan independence in 1914. Tell us more, Musket.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Jan 14 - 10:06 AM

Why, there are moves for Texan independence going on constantly.. ☺. I don't think they'll ever adapt to being just a part of something else!

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jan 14 - 10:14 AM

There's people in Texas advocating secession from the U.S. as I type.
Have been for many years.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 06 Jan 14 - 12:48 PM

The U. S. petroleum companies have little production from the Persian Gulf countries, and major imports only from Saudi Arabia-Kuwait, with Iraq, a minor contributor with company ownership mostly in other hands.

The largest imports, come from Canada (by far the largest contributor), Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia, and Russia (growing imports) and Nigeria. The ratio is 144-66, these countries vs. Saudi-Kuwait

Imports from Colombia slightly exceed the total from Iraq, and Colombia is seldom thought of as a contributor. Italian, French, British and Chinese hold the majority of leases in the Persian Gulf, outside of Saudi Arabia-Kuwait, where ownership is mostly government.

Following the logic of those who claim U. S. oil interests power Middle Eastern conflicts, Canada better watch out!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: kendall
Date: 06 Jan 14 - 01:10 PM

Shot its bolt I believe goes back to the days of the cross bow. Those arrows were called bolts.A long bow in the hands of an English archer was more than a match, as the French found out at places such as Agincourt.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Jan 14 - 01:34 PM

"The Iraq was was stupid from the start, a Bush miscalculation and the UK went along, bringing in the UN."

I stand (alone) on my assessment - the English owned the US "back then" and they still own it and the US pres was/is a puppet whose strings are/were pulled by the British Aristocracy. That tea in the harbour back then is simply tea in the harbor now.

"Well, its kinda like Veet-Nahm all over again. When will they ever learn........."

Ditto - it's battle traing troops and field testing weapons on a live and "real" range. Also, it has the added benefit of reducing the military capabilities of those one wishes to keep at bay, others one wishes to subjugate to one's bidding, and those rivals who may be able to gain an economic benefit from disaccociation with the "allies".

I believe the shell game played using the Germanic tribes under contract by the Romans which began over a thousand years ago goes on as I type. Bush v Blair? Blair by a knockout in round one.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Jan 14 - 09:16 PM

I can see merit in an occupying force in Texas. Maybe they could impose democracy and respect for the rule of law, and for human rights. And, come to that, Ireland.

Tongue only slightly in cheek.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Janie
Date: 06 Jan 14 - 11:36 PM

Perhaps the current iteration of the US executive branch recognizes this is not the 20th century, nor is it similar to any previous century in the history of the world. We are no longer just nations. We are the world. (not the USA, the human species.) The USA did not become a world power until WWII. Not that long ago. Several western European countries were world powers for much, much longer in western history, and several mideastern countries were world powers within the context of the world that was closely reachable for their ages, for much longer than the USA has been. I don't know enough about Asian history to make any general statement.

Mankind finally is populous enough and due to technologies, be they internet communications, airplanes or intercontinental missiles, to have become a very small place. Maybe it is time to truly confront all that is implied by our evolution as a dominant species. It remains to be seen, and I am not hopeful, whether we continue to evolve rapidly enough as a species, to remain a dominant, or even extant species. Whether we do or not, the process will not be pretty. Hard choices to be made. As the currently still dominant world power in a political sense, the USA must decide whether to maintain that archaic position or whether to step back and rethink. Should the rethink be about attempts to preserve and protect ourselves nationally (tribally) or should the rethink be about attempting to preserve the human race, which requires preserving the planet? And if the odds are against either, then what?


Inquiring minds want to know.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: GUEST,ollaimh
Date: 07 Jan 14 - 12:26 AM

thanks Richard but Ireland had an occupying force for several hundred years and it didn't add to the observance of human rights. it did lead to mass starvation and forced emigration, nit to mention military seizure of the natives lands and property.

si gny, bush was under blairs mind control to use roman hired gothic mercenaries to .. oh I;ve lost the thread, have you ever read a history book

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Jan 14 - 04:31 AM

The USA will support the Government of Iraq - the only democratically elected Government the country has ever had in its entire history.

1: Many here on this forum stated that the US had gone into Iraq to "steal Iraqi oil" - They did not steal so much as one barrel.

2: Many here on this forum stated that the US had gone into Iraq to build and then permanently man military bases from which they would attack Iran - Yet the US Government withdrew all its troops as soon as the elected Government of Iraq intimated that their presence was no longer required, in fact they left before the deadline expired.

3: I am at present unaware that the Government of Iraq has requested the intervention within its borders by any US troops.

So the answer to the question posed in the opening post of this thread - Has the US shot its bolt? - is No it has not, not by a long shot. What is happening in both Syria and Iraq today is an Arab problem - leave them to it.

One odd thing I read a couple of days ago though, a British Company has been contracted by the Iraqis down in Basra to act as consultants to improve security in and around the city.

On a purely historical note for kendall:

"Shot its bolt I believe goes back to the days of the cross bow. Those arrows were called bolts.A long bow in the hands of an English archer was more than a match, as the French found out at places such as Agincourt."

It would be Shot his bolt

Crossbow was easier to use but had a slower rate of fire, but far better penetrative power against the armour of the day.

The Crossbowmen with the French at Agincourt were mercenaries and had been paid off as their services were considered to be not required taking into account the massive numerical advantage the French had, so their possible contribution to the battle cannot be evaluated as they took no part in the battle.

Getting back the rate of fire that could be achieved with a Longbow and the time the English archers would have had to have maintained their fire if the myth that they won the battle is to be believed means that at six shafts a minute (Some say twelve could be achieved) the entire English Army at Agincourt would not have been able to carry the number of arrows required to sustain that rate of fire. Remembering of course that that English Army was hungry, thirsty and all but dead on their feet from dysentery - i.e. fed up, fucked up and far from home (They were engaged in a fighting retreat falling back towards the safe evacuation port of Calais)

At Agincourt the French, who were leaderless, basically defeated themselves, English archers only served to "bunch them" together as they struggled in full armour across the ploughed field they elected to march over to attack the English with the end result that they could not deploy to outflank the English and that they were exhausted when they did eventually make contact and come to blows.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Jan 14 - 04:42 AM

Sigh. The current theocracy (in all but name) in Ireland has no respect for the rights of women, and its veneration of capitalist theory has impoverished the workers and unwaged. There's no reason to think that an English occupying force would at present change either of those things.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: ollaimh
Date: 07 Jan 14 - 09:36 AM

i think there is good historical evidence that an English occupation would allow the enjoyment of torture, mass shooting of peacefull civilian protests and forced involvemment in foreign wars.

but Richard bigots never misses the chance to remove the mote from his neighbours eye.

of course there is perfect democracy in England, with no racism bigotry or class oppression(whoopsie they practically invented class oppression inb the modern world and did invent laissez fair capitalism--the driving force behind most of the world's ills)

thanks again for the humour, you're so witty

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Jan 14 - 10:18 AM

Inventive today Ollie. There's plenty wrong with English "democracy" - the prevalence of the right wing politics supported by the preponderance of nearly-fascist media (facilitated by the bitch Thatcher) being but one example. And I frequently say so.

But name me a democracy that does in fact function better. It ain't the USA and it ain't Ireland and it ain't Australia (particularly not Queensland). Nor is it Israel. The French "justice" system would rule France out. Any takers for Germany or a Scandinavian country? How about Iceland? Open to sensible suggestions backed by facts.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Jan 14 - 10:32 AM

I can see merit in an occupying force in Texas. Maybe they could impose democracy and respect for the rule of law, and for human rights.

Not just Texas - all of the old Confederacy.

Big mistake when U.S. troops were pulled out of the South in 1876 and we've been paying for that mistake ever since.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Jan 14 - 10:34 AM

the only democratically elected Government [Iraq] has ever had


BWAHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHHAH!

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: GUEST,Triplane
Date: 07 Jan 14 - 07:15 PM

Vy u make racist kommennt aboot Deutche und Romans vy not uber millions of Irish mercenaries who volumteered to assist the British ruling classes and other europeans over the displacement of ethnic monorities in all the worlds continents.
Have a critical look about your own predjudices and get into the real world. You make Richard appear a minor bigot with your posts

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: kendall
Date: 07 Jan 14 - 08:33 PM

Shot HIS bolt would be proper if you mean a person. The USA is not a person, so, shot its bolt is still proper.

I am very fond of Bernard Cornwell's books. I'm now into The Burning Land.
I used to be into archery before arthritis put the kibosh on that.

I majored in American history, but I'm also very interested in the history of the British Isles.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: kendall
Date: 07 Jan 14 - 09:13 PM

My ancestors stopped there in 1066 on their way to America in 1635

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Jan 14 - 01:30 AM

An "English" occupation of Ireland? I thought it was the unelected Commissioners in Brussels that dictated what had and has to be done throughout the EU. They certainly did during the "bail out" period and actually imposed Governments on the populations of both Greece and Italy when they thought that that was required.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Jan 14 - 01:32 AM

Name any other Greg F

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 08 Jan 14 - 02:48 AM

"Should the rethink be about attempts to preserve and protect ourselves nationally (tribally) or should the rethink be about attempting to preserve the human race, which requires preserving the planet?"

You're absolutely right there, Janie! But at the present time the economy always takes precedence over the environment i.e. economic problems ALWAYS lead to cuts in environmental budgets. That's probably because politicians, economists and captains of industry don't have to breathe, drink water or eat in order to stay alive ... errr ... hang on ... have I got that right?

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Jan 14 - 10:27 AM

The point is "democratically elected", T-bird.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: robomatic
Date: 08 Jan 14 - 03:30 PM

I think it is most properly, allegorically, "shot her bolt"
(Lady Liberty and all that).

Crossbows are not to be dismissed lightly as they appear to be an excellent method of dealing with The Walking Dead.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Jan 14 - 05:16 PM

But yet their use on tea baggers is frowned upon.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: kendall
Date: 08 Jan 14 - 07:49 PM

For now

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Jan 14 - 08:56 PM

"Name any other Greg F."

Google has page after page of Greg F's. Quite a few entries for Teribus too - including one "Teribus the Cursed"... No relation I'm sure though.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: Janie
Date: 08 Jan 14 - 10:34 PM

Hi Shimrod. I don't think the governments, economists and captains of industry are anything other than reflections of the human species.

Seems to me the salient question is not "Has the US [or any other political entity] shot its bolt?" Rather, the question is "Has the human species shot its bolt?"

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: kendall
Date: 09 Jan 14 - 09:50 AM

"And the rot was spreading slow down below." (Wiscasset schooners)

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: kendall
Date: 09 Jan 14 - 07:45 PM

I see history repeating itself. In the year 711, the Muslim hoards invaded Spain. The victims were given two choices, become a Muslim, or die. When they reached France they came up against Charles (The hammer) Martel and he kicked their asses back to Spain.
It looks to me like they are doing the same thing in the middle east. Where is Charles now?

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: bobad
Date: 09 Jan 14 - 07:55 PM

"Where is Charles now?"

He's talking to his plants.

Subject: RE: BS: Has the US shot its bolt?
From: GUEST,Triplane
Date: 10 Jan 14 - 10:19 AM

Charles "the Hammer's" worthy successor Toquemada

as Sgt Schultz would have said "very intersting"