Hey Obama and Bush...f**k your no fly zones by kaneman

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

How many trillions would we have if you conservatards hadn't goose-stepped right off the fiscal cliff with BushCo? Hell, you're STILL singing the praises of the NeoConmen! It's funny that you blame RP's loss(es) on "the libs", when he had virtually no support and no votes WITHIN HIS OWN PARTY. If you fuckers can't stand him, why would you expect anyone else to?

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 20, 2011 5:09 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

"If we want to do something for humanity we need a new foreign policy, that's not built on... picking our dictators. Look at what happened after we picked the dictator for Iran..."

What is he talking about the Shah of Iran for? I actually agree with him on his assessment of the damage of that policy - but what's it got to do with this situation?? It's the same wearisome arguments that you get from anti-war people of every stripe: 'But, but... the CIA!'

Non-interventionists have to show how THIS intervention is wrong, NOW - not how some completely different intervention was wrong somewhere else, 50 years ago.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 20, 2011 8:39 AM

Um, you say that like our wariness is a bad thing.

How's about this for what's bad about getting involved with Libya: just like every other military conflict the world powers have ever gotten involved in, the humanitarian interests will play a backseat to the economic interests.

In other words, trading one yoke (Gadafhi) for another yoke (WTO and imperialism). Frankly, considering how many people die in sweatshops/slave labour conditions, my thinking is the Libyan rebels might be better off fighting their own battle than accepting help from us.

Go check out Frem's response in the other post if you want to see just how little we actually care about the civilians of Libya: targeting hospitals with air strikes does not say to me humanitarian compassion.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 20, 2011 9:09 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
How many trillions would we have if you conservatards hadn't goose-stepped right off the fiscal cliff with BushCo?

You mean the financial disaster which the Dems orchestrated, after gaining power in '06 ? And continued, right up until being swept out of the House ?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 20, 2011 10:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
How many trillions would we have if you conservatards hadn't goose-stepped right off the fiscal cliff with BushCo?

You mean the financial disaster which the Dems orchestrated, after gaining power in '06 ? And continued, right up until being swept out of the House ?

Actually, I was referring to the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 20, 2011 2:59 PM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
Um, you say that like our wariness is a bad thing.

No, wariness is okay - it just has to be on topic.

Quote:
In other words, trading one yoke (Gadafhi) for another yoke (WTO and imperialism).

Hmm. Is that what you consider has happened to Iraq and Afghanistan? In any case I can't see us enforcing that much without ground troops. So we'll see what happens.

Quote:
targeting hospitals with air strikes does not say to me humanitarian compassion.

I haven't heard much about the civilian casualties as yet. I'll read any info you got. 'Targeting' hospitals is a bold claim - why would we target hospitals?

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 20, 2011 3:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Quote:
Um, you say that like our wariness is a bad thing.

No, wariness is okay - it just has to be on topic.

Listening to the usual talking heads today, it was just about word-for-word what we were told 8 years ago: WMD, chemical weapons, he's a terrorist, he'll commit acts of terrorism if we don't stop him, etc., blah blah blah. It's as if we've learned NOTHING in the last eight years.

Quote:

Quote:
In other words, trading one yoke (Gadafhi) for another yoke (WTO and imperialism).

Hmm. Is that what you consider has happened to Iraq and Afghanistan? In any case I can't see us enforcing that much without ground troops. So we'll see what happens.

Absolutely that's what has happened in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Quote:

Quote:
targeting hospitals with air strikes does not say to me humanitarian compassion.

I haven't heard much about the civilian casualties as yet. I'll read any info you got. 'Targeting' hospitals is a bold claim - why would we target hospitals?

It's not personal. It's just war.

They're "collateral damage", generally. Of course, according to the news, we haven't seen ANY civilian casualties. So all those burned-out hulks of cars in the middle of the highways must have just been abandoned there, I'm sure...

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 20, 2011 4:40 PM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
Listening to the usual talking heads today, it was just about word-for-word what we were told 8 years ago: WMD, chemical weapons, he's a terrorist, he'll commit acts of terrorism if we don't stop him, etc., blah blah blah. It's as if we've learned NOTHING in the last eight years.

Drawing parallels with the action taken against Sadaam Hussein is certainly more sensible than bringing up the Shah of Iran. The urgency in this current Libya situation didn't come from a drumbeat though, rather from the way the war was swinging, and what was about to happen to the rebel force and the city of Benghazi.

Quote:
They're "collateral damage", generally. Of course, according to the news, we haven't seen ANY civilian casualties. So all those burned-out hulks of cars in the middle of the highways must have just been abandoned there, I'm sure...

No one believes or is claiming that there will be zero civilian casualties, I'm sure. But we're talking about possibly saving many more lives from Gaddafi's retribution, and changing the fate of an entire country, hopefully for the better.

Obviously we can't predict what the outcome will be, but I'm a believer that if in doubt, do the right thing - and then positive outcomes generally follow. Standing back and wringing one's hands is not always 'the right thing'.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 20, 2011 5:30 PM

Quote:
Obviously we can't predict what the outcome will be, but I'm a believer that if in doubt, do the right thing - and then positive outcomes generally follow. Standing back and wringing one's hands is not always 'the right thing'.

Keep in mind you're being told what "the right thing" is, by people who, in the past, have had no interest in doing "the right thing." They have other agendas, that are potentially just as harmful, if not more, to the Libyan citizens.

I'll give you at least that Gadafhi is bad. But sometimes the best of intentions can also have some very negative outcomes. That is why some of us are on the fence about what seems to be the very "good" motivation of helping rebels throw off an oppressive regime.

When I see foreign nations get involved in a revolution, I see the shadow of the Contra. What happens when some of the rebels turn out to be (or are painted as) Muslim extremists? Isn't it a logical progression to assume that we will then go to war with the former rebels-now-terrorists? And then the only people who we will deem fit to govern will be people we have hand picked - people like Karzai. Or, as a worse possibility, the only people who are still alive.

Will this still seem like "the right thing" then? When the new dictator with foreign sanction is less oust-able than the old one?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 20, 2011 6:13 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

No Fly Zone over Air Farce One...

Funny how The Great Dictator declared war from Brazil, home of so many Nazis...

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 21, 2011 12:41 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
The urgency in this current Libya situation didn't come from a drumbeat though, rather from the way the war was swinging, and what was about to happen to the rebel force and the city of Benghazi

Quote:
Obviously we can't predict what the outcome will be, but I'm a believer that if in doubt, do the right thing - and then positive outcomes generally follow. Standing back and wringing one's hands is not always 'the right thing'.

I agree. I’m not quite the cynic you are, Byte; in this case I don’t think our government WANTS to be involved, especially for its own reasons; I think they were pressured into helping...not that they didn’t want to, given the situation. But I don’t think they wanted yet another war, since Americans are pretty pissed off about Iraq and Afghanistan as it is. Only time will tell, but if they pull back, no boots on the ground, etc., I think it’ll be hard to believe it was warmongering on our government’s part.

Quote:
When the new dictator...

I think you’re buying into fear mongering. We don’t have the vaguest idea who might end up coming to the fore, even tho’ the right so desperately wants us to fear it’ll be the Muslim Brotherhood; me, I’m willing to wait to see, if Ghadafi can be ousted, what transpires. It’s their business, to me, what direction they take from here, and I find it hard to believe that after decades of repression they’re gonna put someone in power who ends up like Ghadafi. Just my opinion.

Oh, Jezus, PN, you have REALLY lost it!! Your obsession with Jews is so pathetic, but your hatefulness absolves me from any pity for you. Too bad you haven't got a life to live, rather than

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 22, 2011 5:01 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
Keep in mind you're being told what "the right thing" is

I'm an itching interventionist in things like this. I see what I consider to be bad things happening and I want to see them stopped. Not so different to Mal. Where Mal and I differ is that I'm a believer in government, specifically democratic government: I want and expect a government that represents me, and can act on my behalf (unlike Mal I can't intervene and take down Gaddafi on my own).

Quote:
When I see foreign nations get involved in a revolution

Or France aiding the American revolutionaries? And that was monarchist France, who had their own motives for aiding your side, which probably weren't 'human freedom'. And Britain was not threatening genocide against American civilians like Gaddafi - so if you can support monarchist France's intervention in the American revolution, perhaps you can support this current intervention on behalf of the Libyan rebels (I say perhaps because the picture isn't completely clear yet).

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 22, 2011 6:17 AM

DREAMTROVE

KPO

You see bad things happening? Where have you been for the last 30 years? Nothing has changed. This has been the situation in the Arab league for decades. The only thing that's changed is that Obama has decided to start a world war over it.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 22, 2011 6:32 AM

No, I don't think I buy your Revolutionary War analogy either. Unless you believe over in England that our Founding Fathers were particularly exemplary individuals?

/Cynic

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 22, 2011 6:55 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
WMD, chemical weapons, he's a terrorist, he'll commit acts of terrorism if we don't stop him

Funny, I haven't heard a word about that, all I've heard is that he's slaughtering his own people. I'm afraid I'm not the cynic some here are, I read Obama's reluctance (as opposed to Bush's enthusiasm) and the LACK of other justification as being valid. I hope we DON'T get involved in something more, and of course that's always a possibility, but I'm quite willing to wait and see.

Of COURSE his political opponents are screaming...no matter what he did, they would be. This is neither new nor surprising; anyone who thinks it IS, or that it's valid, is being disingenuous.

We shall just have to see what the future brings, as far as I'm concerned.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 22, 2011 10:54 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
You see bad things happening? Where have you been for the last 30 years? Nothing has changed. This has been the situation in the Arab league for decades. The only thing that's changed is that Obama has decided to start a world war over it.

I see plenty of change, in recent months. I believe it's not for us to impose democracy on the middle east (Iraq), but when democracy movements spring up organically the least we can do is step out of the way (Egypt), or assist them out if we're feeling bold (Libya).

Though I'll concede, we're still to see how things play out in each of these countries in the long term.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 22, 2011 11:12 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
No, I don't think I buy your Revolutionary War analogy either. Unless you believe over in England that our Founding Fathers were particularly exemplary individuals?

I'm not trying to romanticise either movement. But surely you must view French intervention in the American War of Independence to be a good thing, given that it was most likely decisive? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_in_the_American_Revolutionary_War

I think one has to be pragmatic about these things: if you celebrate the outcome, you have to give credit to the means - even if you don't like them/find them palatable.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 22, 2011 11:46 AM

Quote:
But surely you must view French intervention in the American War of Independence to be a good thing, given that it was most likely decisive?

Not particularly, to be honest. People died on both sides, both sides had their share of people exploiting the whole shebang. I'm not particularly for War profiteers or the deaths of Americans OR Brits. And I have various issues about how the US Government turned out, and how the war is constantly called back upon as justification by Americans for the use of Force.

So don't think I'm all that happy when a Brit tries it on me. I know exactly what you're up to. Trying to exploit national stereotypes and propaganda in an appeal to pathos is not a logically valid argument.

I don't want to still be under the queen's thumb, don't get me wrong, being under the thumb of foreign interests and non-foreign moneyed special interests is pretty bad by itself. But considering most of the commonwealths of the Empire were given sovereignty, and most of those commonwealths did eventually have their own local political organization, your argument that the Revolutionary War was necessary for the formation of the current U.S. government is probably incorrect.

I also note that involvement in our war didn't exactly turn out so well for the French in question. Which is pretty much the inevitable outcome of a foreign power getting involved in a civil or revolutionary war. In fact, if I were as much the heartless type people say I am, I'd be for this new war 'cause it'll drain the coffers and might collapse our government or lead to a rebellion against it. But I'm not, because I know there'd be lots of economic turmoil and starving people if the government fell like this. So here we are.

Quote:
I think one has to be pragmatic about these things: if you celebrate the outcome, you have to give credit to the means - even if you don't like them/find them palatable.

...That is the biggest... But then, I'm forgetting. You ARE an end justifies the means kind of person, and also a for the greater good kind of person. To that end, the both of us may as well be talking to an alien sentience with blue and orange morality.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 22, 2011 1:14 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Actually, I was referring to the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Oh, so THAT'S what you think caused all this economic down turn?

Really?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 22, 2011 1:39 PM

Well, when you blow a couple trillion bucks AND go around handing out massive tax cuts, it's definitely going to come back to bite you in the ass. Deregulating everything and gutting the regulatory agencies didn't help, either.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 22, 2011 1:42 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Quote:
No, I don't think I buy your Revolutionary War analogy either. Unless you believe over in England that our Founding Fathers were particularly exemplary individuals?

I'm not trying to romanticise either movement. But surely you must view French intervention in the American War of Independence to be a good thing, given that it was most likely decisive? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_in_the_American_Revolutionary_War

I think one has to be pragmatic about these things: if you celebrate the outcome, you have to give credit to the means - even if you don't like them/find them palatable.

It's not personal. It's just war.

A "good thing" for whom? For the Americans? Quite possibly. Not such a good thing for the French, as it turned out. Basically collapsed their economy and led to a massive revolution and bloodletting on their home turf, and led directly to Napoleon coming to power.

I guess if you view that as a positive outcome of their involvement...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 22, 2011 2:12 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Well, when you blow a couple trillion bucks AND go around handing out massive tax cuts, it's definitely going to come back to bite you in the ass. Deregulating everything and gutting the regulatory agencies didn't help, either.

Thanks for proving my point.

Crassic.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 22, 2011 2:52 PM

Yes, the point that the policies of the Bush administration led directly to the crash have long been known. Signy was warning you about the result of such policies as far back as 2005. Nothing new there. The idea that Barney Frank caused the crash, despite chairing no committees and having no real power in Congress at the time also been long established.

Thanks for again proving my point.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 22, 2011 5:00 PM