Bear Bombers Over Guam

They weren't IN our "sovereign airspace OVER Guam"... But thanks for playing...

Perhaps since "freebeacon" is such a wealth of inaccurate information about everything else, they can tell you why? But since U.S. MILITARY OFFICIALS SAID they:

...remained in international airspace, the encounter between the U.S. and Russian aircraft “stayed professional” and there was no incident. The official said it’s impossible to determine whether the Russian bombers carried any nuclear weapons.

U.S. military officials say “it’s highly unusual but not unprecedented” that Russian bombers would fly training missions in the vicinity of Guam. According to one official, “It wasn’t provocative but it certainly got our attention.” U.S. long-range B-52 bombers, also capable of carrying nuclear weapons, are based at Guam.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013 ... -guam?lite

See, "stayed professional" means that when contacted by U.S. security and radar intercept, they PROFESSIONALLY identified themselves, and stayed in INTERNATIONAL AIRSPACE... (Which, by the way, is NOT "OVER GUAM"... Which would be a lie.)

I now return you to your regularly scheduled FEAR-fest, courtesy of the right-wing "hysteri-blogs"...

I didn't generate the title of the news post; you would prefer the title be "Russian Bear Bombers in the Proximity of Guam?" Talk about splitting hairs! Split a frog hair five ways and what's left?

"Blame the source"? I don't think so...

I'm EXPOSING the LIES in your source, using the information supplied by "U.S. MILITARY OFFICIALS." I don't give a rat's patooty whether you think the ""U.S. MILITARY OFFICIALS" are lying and "freebeacon" is telling the truth... (If you do, that says more about YOU than anything else...) I also didn't say you "generated the title"...Again, I'm pointing out the distortion (read: lie) in your source. They would rather whip up the low-information folks into a fear-frenzy by lying about the fact that the bombers were "OVER GUAM", when they weren't.... And yeah, I think that's a pretty significant difference. I rather think the U.S. forces on Guam would think that's a pretty significant difference too, or there would have been an international "incident."

Spare me your poor "veteran-victimhood"... I've already stated that "using the word 'veteran' in a sentence" is no proof to me of anything other than you went in, and you got out. Last I heard, my "rights & freedom" also give me the right to think that just about everything you think, say and do are things that I will continue to oppose in every way possible.

Clearly you have no understanding of what it takes to defend our nation. Worse, I spent too many years serving our country to allow you the right to disrespect everyone and everything that is guaranteeing your rights right now. Enjoy your freedom of speech while it lasts. In the meanwhile - ALPHA MIKE FOXTROT!

ALPHA MIKE FOXTROT... Same to you too...

My freedom of speech includes the right to think that most veterans I encounter that are like you are veterans that I have no wish to know.

Thanks for the credit that everyone who has fought and died to ensure your rights and freedom. I almost regret enabling people like you, but at the same time I pledged to do it and I keep my promises. Let's let this be our last exchange, you clearly can't have a reasonable conversation with anyone who isn't in lock step with you and your liberal opinions. Call me a baby killer and spit on my uniform, I obviously deserve it.

And you have no idea how much I regret that there are people like you as a representative of "veterans"... It would appear that you are more upset with my refusal to be "in lock-step" with your extremist neo-con views than I am with your not being in lock-step with me. I don't see that I'm being "unreasonable." You posted an article based on lies and distortions, and I pointed them out with FACTS from "U.S. Military OFFICIALS"... If that's being "unreasonable", then so be it.

And why would I call you a "baby killer" and "spit on your uniform"?...I never did before... If that's some sort of asinine generalization that everyone who opposes unnecessary wars engages in that kind of behavior, it's no surprise that yet another Rightie "myth" continues to be circulated among the low-intelligence crowd who will believe anything, as long as it's from a Rightie source...

Myth Making and Spitting Images from Vietnam

You and I will never agree.

And that's okay... It's not "being unreasonable" to do so.

Don't whine when the bombs fall in your front yard, not that you'll have time to do that when they are nukes.