450 posts IS a worse crime than wanting to kill us . by AURaptor

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I can only conclude that literacy isn't your strong suit. If your lips get tired when you're reading, you're doing it wrong.

What's wrong, don't like it when someone plays your game?
Can you dish it out but not take it?
You are familiar with the winky face icon are you not?

Oh, I'd love it if you played my game. Thing is, you showed up unarmed to a battle of wits. You need to step your game up. Is this the best you've got?

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

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

Wednesday, May 13, 2009 6:53 PM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Oh, I'd love it if you played my game. Thing is, you showed up unarmed to a battle of wits. You need to step your game up. Is this the best you've got?

I don't know, why don't you ask Rue.

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

Wednesday, May 13, 2009 7:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Not at all.
You postulated that because the U.S. used atomic weapons before, they could use them again if it was deemed necessary by the 'powers that be'. The U.S. has a history of slavery, and segregation was still occuring at the same time as WW2. If deemed necessary by the 'powers that be' do you think the U.S. would revert back to segregation or even slavery? Because the precedent was set does that mean the option is always on the table?

I don't think your analogy is a good one. Slavery and segregation have been banned. You still have a stockpile of nuclear weapons. The mind set around use of nuclear weapons hasn't really changed at all. Most people would consider it to have been necessary to drop the bomb to end WW2, and that the US has the right to own, and if necessary use, nuclear weapons in similar circumstances. On the other hand, most people find slavery abhorrent.

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 7:40 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Except that the US has used nuclear weapons and does use its power for its own gain, is currently involved in a number of wars and proxy wars that can pretty much be viewed as being about power and control, and that culturally and economically has dominated (conquered?) the world for the past sixty years.

In that regards, I'm not sure I would describe the US as having restraint.

You are making the mistake of looking at what the United States has done without placing it in a historical context or comparing it to the actions of other nations.

Following WW2 the United States rebuilt its allies and enemies and engaged most of them in economic, social, and military partnerships designed to promote peace, mutual security, and prosperity. The Soviet Union conquered its neighbors, enslaving entire nations behind an "Iron Curtain" ruled with absolute military force and attempted to spread that domination and control through a pattern of global destabilization and outright conquest.

In the years prior to WW2 the United States and Germany were the leading world powers. One conquered, the other liberated (but only after being attacked).

Had the United States acted as other nations have traditionally acted when given the military and economic power we have...then there would be an American Empire spreading beyond the Western Hemisphere (assuming somebody like the United States wasn't out there to stop us).

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 7:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Well it's very much the same as handguns, except on a grander scale.

The scale makes the all the difference.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 7:54 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
No idea. Are you trying to say that dropping bombs on Japan was like owning slaves?

Yes...exactly like that. He's not talking about how just because something that happened in the past does not mean it will happen again...he's talking about exploding slaves.

Exploding slaves were always a threat to southern farmers prior to the Civil War.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 7:58 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by RIPWash:
Against one nation that attacked us aggressively for no reason and only as the last resort to get them to surrender after years of fighting. If I have my history right, that is.

Depends what you mean by "no reason". The Japanese had their reasons, when America blocked Japanese access to Oil and other raw materials, war was pretty much inevitable. Arguably the only way Japan had of securing it's interests was to go to war with the US, and the only way it had to secure a victory was with the tactics it used.

Not that any of that excuses the Japanese actions, but it does put the war in the Pacific in a more deterministic and understandable vein, rather than the irrational actions of a crazed war like race

.

As for the reasoning for the use of Atomic weapons, I think the issue is muddier than the "it made them surrender earlier so saved lives" spin it's often put in.

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 8:00 AM

RIPWASH

Quote:
I am pretty sure that Dubya did indeed tell Saddam that "you will do as I say or you will suffer the consequences (i.e., death)." He seems to believe that this was his mission from god.

I think you know that I meant that radical LEADERS say to people of their own country, "Do as I say . . . " I may not have clarified the leader part.

Quote:
But then, if someone acts like a terrorist and then claims to be Muslim, don't you have to question THAT, too?

In a sense I suppose so. But when it appears that the MAJORITY of terrorists are of the Muslim faith, claiming their acts to be the will of Allah/Mohamed . . . that leaves little to question.

Quote:
Does the reverend Donald Wildmon ring any bells? How 'bout li'l' Timmy McVeigh? Eric Rudolph? David Koresh?

Of these, one is a "fire and brimstone" former teacher whom I don't remember actually harming anyone - just outspoken. Then Timmy McVeigh was raised Catholic but was agnostic at the time of the bombings. Eric Rudolph a white supremecist who claimed that none of his actions were based on his religious beliefs and David "The Wacko in Waco" was a nutjob who claimed to be Jesus, yet had sex with many women in his cult including pre-teen girls. That automatically, in MY book, makes him a NON-Christian because his actions did not match his supposed belief system.

The one that Frem noted? No mention of religious belief of the accused. Just that he was a white supremacist which doesn't mean a thing in my book in terms of faith. If they claim to be Biblically based, they're dead wrong.

What I'm lookin' for, Kwickster, is proof claim that there are Christian Terrorist here in America. People who wantonly kill people in the name of Jesus Christ.

*********************************************
Mal: You think she'll hold together?
Zoë: She's torn up plenty, but she'll fly true.
Mal: Could be bumpy.
Zoë: Always is

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 8:00 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Had the United States acted as other nations have traditionally acted when given the military and economic power we have...then there would be an American Empire spreading beyond the Western Hemisphere (assuming somebody like the United States wasn't out there to stop us).

Arguably that is the case.

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 8:04 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by RIPWash:
What I'm lookin' for, Kwickster, is proof claim that there are Christian Terrorist here in America. People who wantonly kill people in the name of Jesus Christ.

Like the Lambs of God?

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 8:07 AM

RIPWASH

Quote:
Like the Lambs of God?

Enlighten me, my friend. I'm only finding a heavy metal group for that name.

*********************************************
Mal: You think she'll hold together?
Zoë: She's torn up plenty, but she'll fly true.
Mal: Could be bumpy.
Zoë: Always is

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 8:12 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by RIPWash:
Quote:
Like the Lambs of God?

Enlighten me, my friend. I'm only finding a heavy metal group for that name.

*********************************************
Mal: You think she'll hold together?
Zoë: She's torn up plenty, but she'll fly true.
Mal: Could be bumpy.
Zoë: Always is

Sorry, Lambs of Christ. They're a Christian group that advocates and carries out bombings and murders of people associated with abortion clinics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lambs_of_Christ

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 8:17 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"... wantonly kill people ..."

Is that different from sniper fire (Dr. Barnett Slepian killed by James Charles Kopp, who was affiliated with The Lambs of Christ, a Christian terrorist organization), or from bombing clinics and public events (Army of God), or from posting hit lists (christiangallery) ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 9:09 AM

Actually Koresh was cleared of those accusations even before the feds rolled in on him - as well, despite claims to the contrary, not one illegal weapon was every recovered.

The POINT of it all is that you cannot blame an entire belief system for the actions of individuals claiming to hold that belief unless you are willing to apply that broad brush to all of them - and you might bear in mind you happen to be discussing this with someone who has two metal pins in their ankle following an outright attempted murder by members of a local Christian congregation that was entirely religion-inspired.

And yet, some of my staunchest allies in child protective work are also Christian, one of whom is a former nun who's a heck of a lady and a bit of moral inspiration - one of the few folk whos advice I will listen to when an issue gets morally complex, despite not sharing her beliefs.

It ain't the belief systems, it's the people who use them as a vessel to gain power, or as an excuse for behavior that's not only inexcusable, but also contrary to the belief itself!

The Muslim faith has some pretty strong words on the treatment of captives, women, children and noncombatants - as well as an outright injunction against proselytizing, where it's clearly indicated they are to lead by example, and that is also echoed by Christian belief in several biblical passages.

And all three beliefs, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam - state a familiar relation and explicitly forbid the practice of fratricide, which to anyone who truly holds those beliefs within them, must be revolting to watch as those claiming the belief defile it in His name.

And just for the education of those who believe that said beliefs cannot co-exist in peace, allow me to point out that they can and have, Mohammed penned the Medina Compact in 622 AD allowing for exactly that, and including many concepts found in our own modern Constitution and Bill of Rights.

I think that a failure to understand just how fanatics have distorted the quran to suit their purposes is a detriment to the possibility of convincing their own people to chuck these numnutz out of power - were we to remove our threat against their whole region, culture and belief, and refine it against ONLY those fanatical elements while expressing our ire at their defilement of His word... we'd pick up a hell of a lot more allies than considering anyone of that belief whatsoever to be evil-by-default.

Just cause I don't care for, nor practice, a belief doesn't mean I know nothing OF it, and for a fact I know more about most common beliefs than many of the folk who DO practice them, enough to argue with their interpretations of it clearly in contravention of plainly stated principles.

If one wants to tar all of Islam, or all folk of arabic descent and culture, with a single brush, then one should not be too damn surprised when someone picks up that same brush to smear their honkey cracker whitebread bible thumpin asses.

Did it never occur to you that the locals hate them fanatics, but wincingly tolerate them as the only effective defense against continued american exploitations and abuses ?

It's just thinly veiled racism and intolerance, is all it is, so don't be surprised when someone rips the veil off and calls one on it.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 9:22 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

HERO

Quote:
there would be an American Empire spreading beyond the Western Hemisphere (assuming somebody like the United States wasn't out there to stop us).

I suppose our army bases throught the Middle East and Asia don't count as a military empire in support of capitalism? (Just to hammer that nail a little, 'cause it's sticking up)

----------------------
We should have strapped him into a glider, filled it nose heavy w/ explosives, and dropped his Allah lovin' ass into a large, empty field. After which, release wild boars into the area so they could make good use of his remains. Now THAT's justice.- rappy

Yeah, that's what Sheikh Issa said. Seems you both have a lot in common.- signy

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 9:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
HERO
Quote:
there would be an American Empire spreading beyond the Western Hemisphere (assuming somebody like the United States wasn't out there to stop us).
I suppose our army bases throught the Middle East and Asia don't count as a military empire in support of capitalism? (Just to hammer that nail a little, 'cause it's sticking up)

----------------------
We should have strapped him into a glider, filled it nose heavy w/ explosives, and dropped his Allah lovin' ass into a large, empty field. After which, release wild boars into the area so they could make good use of his remains. Now THAT's justice.- rappy

Yeah, that's what Sheikh Issa said. Seems you both have a lot in common.- signy

Or, y'know, those little bitty forays we made in trying to extend our empire into places like Korea and Vietnam... Or were we just practicing The Domino Theory in reverse, hoping we could prop them all up like dominoes, so they'd never fall?

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 9:43 AM

I'd have thought the obvious examples would be the westward expansion. The US went from 13 States clinging to the edge of the continent, to a nation that stretches from "sea to shining sea". Much of it through military conflict with contemporaries such as Mexico, and American natives. Manifest destiny anyone? Just because America isn't referred to as an Empire, doesn't mean it isn't one in the same vein as the empires of it's contemporary European rivals.

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 3:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
You are making the mistake of looking at what the United States has done without placing it in a historical context or comparing it to the actions of other nations.

Following WW2 the United States rebuilt its allies and enemies and engaged most of them in economic, social, and military partnerships designed to promote peace, mutual security, and prosperity. The Soviet Union conquered its neighbors, enslaving entire nations behind an "Iron Curtain" ruled with absolute military force and attempted to spread that domination and control through a pattern of global destabilization and outright conquest.

In the years prior to WW2 the United States and Germany were the leading world powers. One conquered, the other liberated (but only after being attacked).

Had the United States acted as other nations have traditionally acted when given the military and economic power we have...then there would be an American Empire spreading beyond the Western Hemisphere (assuming somebody like the United States wasn't out there to stop us).

You are making the mistake of looking down a myopic lens on history, one which places the US at the centre of everything and as an absolute force for good in the world.

Where to begin? Prior to WW2, there weren't just two world powers as you claim. It was the last decades of the colonial era, where a number of empires were falling to pieces, while still jostling for power, while new empires were emerging.

ww2 was the final death knoll for the European empires, they were basically to shed most of their colonies and influence throughout the world over the following decades (although by regrouping into one economic partnership, they repositioned themselves on the world stage)> US and USSR emerged as the major world powers, at least for a time.

Empires come in many shapes and sizes, some of them are better than others. There is no doubt that the US has the features of an empire, albeit a different kind to those of the colonial era. There is also no doubt that as an empire, you score much higher on the morality scale than the former USSR, but that aint saying much.

Empires have their own best interest at the forefront of their decision making. Rebuilding after WW2 was in the best interest of the US, otherwise it wouldn't have happened. The US has and does continue to flex its military and economic muscle first and foremost for the sake of its own gain, as other empires have done in the past. As someone pointed out earlier, the US has military bases throughout the world and has actively and covertly engaged in regime change to safeguard its 'markets'.

In all of this, I'm not saying that there hasn't been benefits from the US actions for some of the world (particularly those that support and engage in US trade and military action). But that was pretty much the case with other empires as well. ie What have the Romans ever done for us?

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 3:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Actually...thats kinda where the bar needs to be. Torturing a terrorist for information is NOT as bad as causing or attempting to cause the death of innocent people.

Seems our options include being better then they are...or being worse with death as the deciding factor. If avoiding death requires torture...we torture and are still better then them. The day may come when we have to be worse then them...and we all know that we can be worse then them very easily. We have vast fields and storehouses of 'worse' we could unleash at a moments notice but for our compassion and mercy.

A little water and discomfort is a mild price to pay for the continued existance of an entire people. If we were them...they would cease to exist in the fire of American fury. But we're not them...so instead the get water and mercy. Such is life.

Are you kidding me? Like the entire existence of 'your people' has ever been at stake here.

Let me ask you this, you say you are not racist, okay? But if 'they' do terrible stuff and 'you' do terrible stuff, what's to differentiate between you both, except for your race or nationality?

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 3:38 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:

Let me ask you this, you say you are not racist, okay? But if 'they' do terrible stuff and 'you' do terrible stuff, what's to differentiate between you both, except for your race or nationality?

'They' started it, and 'we' will end it.

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 3:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:

Let me ask you this, you say you are not racist, okay? But if 'they' do terrible stuff and 'you' do terrible stuff, what's to differentiate between you both, except for your race or nationality?

'They' started it, and 'we' will end it.

Lovely. Will we all be blown back to the stone age at the end, or will heaven prevail on earth?

In any case, I didn't ask what the outcome would be, I asked what the difference would be, if 'you' or 'we' acted as badly as 'they' do? Because if that isn't what the conflict is about - ie we behave better than they do - it comes down to -we are better than they are - and that's where it gets problematic.

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 4:23 PM

America loves a winner!

magonsdaughter,

No, it comes down to a sect of nut cases who want to control the world, or kill those they can't control , and us, who don't take kindly to having women forced into slavery, treated as cattle and all the other great benefits that comes w/ living under their brand of Sharia law.

How you continue to not get that, even after all that has gone on, and all that's been shown to you, really - in all honesty - leaves me numb.

I can't even take seriously your position for too long, or my brain just might solidify into lead , my head topple over and fall hard on the floor, with a loud THUNK! sound.

I ask you, what in the name of great Ceaser's ghost are you even THINKING about which would give you such a view ?

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 6:05 PM

Quote:
No, it comes down to a sect of nut cases who want to control the world, or kill those they can't control

You mean the ones in Washington DC, right ?

Quote:
There is also no doubt that as an empire, you score much higher on the morality scale than the former USSR, but that aint saying much.

Citizen actually said it best, something along the lines of "better than a tinpot dictatorship" being a piss-poor rod to measure our own actions by.

-F

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 6:17 PM

AUraptor,
I could ask you the same thing, because your simple minded view of the complexities of the world stage is simply breathtaking.

Firstly, just because I don't condone torture doesn't mean that I support terrorist activity. I find that I have to say this a lot because some how rightwingers seem too dense to grasp this concept.

I do believe in the right of other countries to determine their own leaders and laws, even when I don't support those laws. However, when it comes to human rights abuses, I condemn them where I see them, friend or foe.

I think there is a hell of lot of inconsistency in the discourse of right . Iranians are bad because of the Sharia law, yet the country with the strictest Sharia law is one of US greatest allies - Saudi Arabia. Many so called friendly countries treat their citizens barbarically, yet the US doesn't rush to invade to save the citizens. The US makes decisions that are largely economic. Which is okay, it's just that there is a lot of dishonesty about it, that people like yourself have swallowed hook, line and sinker.

I don't believe two rights make a wrong. The shocking behaviour of terrorist groups, internationally condemned, does not mean the US need resort to their methods. Doesn't make sense to do so. What's the frakking point if you end up with a superpower that's as bad as those they oppose.

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 7:21 PM

BADKARMA00

Fremdfirma wrote:

The POINT of it all is that you cannot blame an entire belief system for the actions of individuals claiming to hold that belief unless you are willing to apply that broad brush to all of them - and you might bear in mind you happen to be discussing this with someone who has two metal pins in their ankle following an outright attempted murder by members of a local Christian congregation that was entirely religion-inspired.

---------------------

Very well said, Frem. And that is the crux of issues just like this one. Blaming an entire culture for the acts of a few individuals, or even a small group.
----------------------
Fremdfirma wrote:
Thursday, May 14, 2009 09:09

It ain't the belief systems, it's the people who use them as a vessel to gain power, or as an excuse for behavior that's not only inexcusable, but also contrary to the belief itself!
------------------

Again, I agree. People who desire power often see religion as a path to acquiring that power, by leading a mass of their 'faithful' through lies and deceit.

As to interference in other nations affairs, I've stated before that I'm not a true isolationist, but I do have a very strong 'America First' policy. I fail to see why we should be involved anywhere overseas so long as we have people suffering here at home.

But, as always, that's just me.

Bad_karma
Great and Exalted Grand Pooba, International Brotherhood of Moonshiners, Rednecks, and Good Old Boys.

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

Thursday, May 14, 2009 9:34 PM

Ain't just you, not by a longshot - I am all in favor of cutting foreign aid cause we damn well can't afford it, and some of the OTHER expenses on the budget make me tack spitting pissed, like multimillion dollar funding of foreign militaries.
(yes, I shit you not, there's a budget item for this, look it up)

Fuck that, let em buy their own damn guns and tanks, especially since in many cases like, say... AFGHANISTAN, for example, we've wound up staring down the barrels of weapons initially paid for with US Tax dollars!

Gee, that was a GREAT idea, who's was it, do tell, cause we got an opinion to express!

-F

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 12:19 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
'They' started it, and 'we' will end it.

They'd argue you started it.

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 1:59 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

No, it comes down to a sect of nut cases who want to control the world, or kill those they can't control...

Well, at least now you're starting to finally see the NeoCons for what they truly are!

Quote:

...and us, who don't take kindly to having women forced into slavery, treated as cattle...

Except, of course, that that is EXACTLY what conservatives want to do to women, at least as far as reproductive rights go.

Quote:
How you continue to not get that, even after all that has gone on, and all that's been shown to you, really - in all honesty - leaves me numb.

Maybe a few rounds of torture would remove your numbness.

Quote:

I can't even take seriously your position for too long, or my brain just might solidify into lead , my head topple over and fall hard on the floor, with a loud THUNK! sound.

DOH! - Too late!

Quote:

I ask you, what in the name of great Ceaser's ghost are you even THINKING about which would give you such a view ?

I could ask the same of you; what is it in your head that allows you to so enthusiastically endorse torture? What is it that lets you justify torturing people for your own little sick and twisted jollies? And that's really what it's all about, because you're sure as hell not getting any useful intel out of anyone that way.

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 2:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Ain't just you, not by a longshot - I am all in favor of cutting foreign aid cause we damn well can't afford it, and some of the OTHER expenses on the budget make me tack spitting pissed, like multimillion dollar funding of foreign militaries.
(yes, I shit you not, there's a budget item for this, look it up)

Fuck that, let em buy their own damn guns and tanks, especially since in many cases like, say... AFGHANISTAN, for example, we've wound up staring down the barrels of weapons initially paid for with US Tax dollars!

Gee, that was a GREAT idea, who's was it, do tell, cause we got an opinion to express!

-F

Hell, you don't even have to look that far. Just look to your immediate south. All those automatic weapons which the Mexican cartels supposedly bought at U.S. gun shows? Yeah, turns out they came from the U.S., all right - the U.S. GOVERNMENT, who gave them to the Federales to fight the War on (some) Drugs. And corrupt Federales then turned around and sold entire shipments to the cartels, to use against us. Just fucking beautiful.

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 2:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
I suppose our army bases throught the Middle East and Asia don't count as a military empire in support of capitalism? (Just to hammer that nail a little, 'cause it's sticking up)

No, they don't count.

In fact...its kind of silly to compare the US's Ramstein Air Base in Germany...to the German occupation of Poland or France. The US does not seek to administer, control, or enforce its will upon Germany. Germany is not a part of the greater American Reich.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 2:50 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
...and us, who don't take kindly to having women forced into slavery, treated as cattle...

Except, of course, that that is EXACTLY what conservatives want to do to women, at least as far as reproductive rights go.

Sure...a Constitutional and moral disagreement on the nature of life is certainly in the same catagory as stoning a woman for being raped, learning to read, showing her face, driving a car, talking out of turn, walking in public, having a job, voting, having an opinion, or just for the hell of it.

Lets hear it for feminists everywhere!

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 2:55 AM

BADKARMA00

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Ain't just you, not by a longshot - I am all in favor of cutting foreign aid cause we damn well can't afford it, and some of the OTHER expenses on the budget make me tack spitting pissed, like multimillion dollar funding of foreign militaries.
(yes, I shit you not, there's a budget item for this, look it up)

Fuck that, let em buy their own damn guns and tanks, especially since in many cases like, say... AFGHANISTAN, for example, we've wound up staring down the barrels of weapons initially paid for with US Tax dollars!

Gee, that was a GREAT idea, who's was it, do tell, cause we got an opinion to express!

-F

Hell, you don't even have to look that far. Just look to your immediate south. All those automatic weapons which the Mexican cartels supposedly bought at U.S. gun shows? Yeah, turns out they came from the U.S., all right - the U.S. GOVERNMENT, who gave them to the Federales to fight the War on (some) Drugs. And corrupt Federales then turned around and sold entire shipments to the cartels, to use against us. Just fucking beautiful.

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

------------------------

----------------------
And that's a sore spot for me too, especially with some in the HObama administration and in the Mexican government as well. There is a myth ( i.e. LIE ) that is being passed of as an established fact that 90% of the weaponry confiscated in Mexico from the cartels are being traced to the US. THis is complete BULL.

In truth, only about 10% of the weapons seized are traceable in any form. Of those 10%, yes, roughly 90% are from the US. THe fact is that most of the cartel weaponry is from all over the world, especially from former Soviet states looking to sell off large armories to raise cash.

I have been told by people working along the border that Czech weapons and ammunition are very common. I don't know that this it true, thus I don't claim it as fact, but I do know that the Czech's are damn good at making weapons and ammunition. By that I mean they're good quality.

HObama's Attorney General seized on this 'fact' to comment that this was a good enough reason to implement stricter gun laws here in the US. At least the HO man had the guts to stand up and say 'no' to that one.

Sorry, this thread really isn't about that, so I should just cut this off. Annyway, I'm in agreement with you two. On this anyway,

-----------------------

Bad_karma
Great and Exalted Grand Pooba, International Brotherhood of Moonshiners, Rednecks, and Good Old Boys.

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 3:30 AM

BK, there are usually at least one or two active 2nd-Amendment threads going around here. Look up the HR45 thread for the latest one.

Believe it or not, even some of us "left-wing loonies" are staunch 2A supporters. Hell, I'm a fan of ALL the Amendments in the Bill of Rights, myself.

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 3:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Sure...a Constitutional and moral disagreement on the nature of life is certainly in the same catagory as stoning a woman for being raped, learning to read, showing her face, driving a car, talking out of turn, walking in public, having a job, voting, having an opinion, or just for the hell of it.

Sure, blowing up clinics who offer abortion services or [GASP!] advice on birth control certainly is nothing like Sharia law... except that it IS Sharia law, just in another form.

You're angry because fundamentalist Islam has horned in on your racket and been more successful at it than the conservative movement in the U.S. has been. You're mad because they actually ARE able to keep 'em at home, barefoot and pregnant, while you haven't figured out how to pull that off. Not that it'll stop you from trying, of course...

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 3:37 AM

BADKARMA00

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
BK, there are usually at least one or two active 2nd-Amendment threads going around here. Look up the HR45 thread for the latest one.

Believe it or not, even some of us "left-wing loonies" are staunch 2A supporters. Hell, I'm a fan of ALL the Amendments in the Bill of Rights, myself.

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

--------------------
I hear you. I don't automatically assume that all democrats are liberal, or left wing loonies. As I've said before, I'm a staunch conservative, but I have no more love for the 'right wing loonies' than I do for the left.

And it wasn't really about the 2nd, which is why I added that. It was in response to your comment about where the cartels are getting their guns, etc.

And I know a great many like you, who lean to the left, as I think you said it, and still believe in the 2nd amendment. Like I said, I don't assume that all left leaning people are loonie. Which really helps, since my wife is a liberal, LOL

Bad_karma
Great and Exalted Grand Pooba, International Brotherhood of Moonshiners, Rednecks, and Good Old Boys.

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 3:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Sure, blowing up clinics who offer abortion services or [GASP!] advice on birth control certainly is nothing like Sharia law... except that it IS Sharia law, just in another form.

Your point is kinda silly...wait...its hard to hear myself think with the sound of all the exploding abortion clinics.

If its another form...its not Sharia law...hang on...another exploding clinic.

A rose by any other name is still a rose...exploding clinic, that was a big one...but an apple tree is not a rose, even if you call it a rose.

Lets compare the number of women stoned last year to the...damn exploding clinic, aborted fetus all over my suit...number of exploding clinics.

Big one in Cleveland this time, damn, I think a chunk of feminism just landed on my car.

Hey...has anyone considered that maybe its the fetuses that are explosive and not the Christian protestors?

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 2:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Sure...a Constitutional and moral disagreement on the nature of life is certainly in the same catagory as stoning a woman for being raped, learning to read, showing her face, driving a car, talking out of turn, walking in public, having a job, voting, having an opinion, or just for the hell of it.

Lets hear it for feminists everywhere!
2009.

Like what happens in Saudi Arabia. Are the invasion forces ready yet, so that the US can once again fearlessly right the evils of this world? Like what happens to a similar extent in Egypt and Morrocco. Oh wait, those countries were so useful when the US was shipping enemy combatants back there for some realy nasty torture.

But they're on our side, right? So all that stuff is okay as long as us and ours are doing it. Bad when our enemies are.

Okkkaaaaaaaayy

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 2:54 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
I suppose our army bases throught the Middle East and Asia don't count as a military empire in support of capitalism? (Just to hammer that nail a little, 'cause it's sticking up)

No, they don't count.

In fact...its kind of silly to compare the US's Ramstein Air Base in Germany...to the German occupation of Poland or France. The US does not seek to administer, control, or enforce its will upon Germany. Germany is not a part of the greater American Reich.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

Doesn't mean that you still don't have an expansionist empire, just because its not as brutal as the Third Reich. Few empires have been as brutal as that one, which surprisingly only lasted a few years anyway. Maybe you should think about the British Empire, which did a whole lot of building, roads and transport,public building, established justice and democratic government systems, education and so on its empire building. Not all aspects of empire is evil, its just that most peoples eventually get sick of being a dominion and second class citizens.

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 3:11 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Quote:
AYour point is kinda silly...wait...its hard to hear myself think with the sound of all the exploding abortion clinics.
If its another form...its not Sharia law...hang on...another exploding clinic.
A rose by any other name is still a rose...exploding clinic, that was a big one...but an apple tree is not a rose, even if you call it a rose.
Lets compare the number of women stoned last year to the...damn exploding clinic, aborted fetus all over my suit...number of exploding clinics.
Big one in Cleveland this time, damn, I think a chunk of feminism just landed on my car.
Hey...has anyone considered that maybe its the fetuses that are explosive and not the Christian protestors?

And you call yourself a lawyer ? Even as pure bullshit, that was pretty lame.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 5:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Sure, blowing up clinics who offer abortion services or [GASP!] advice on birth control certainly is nothing like Sharia law... except that it IS Sharia law, just in another form.

Your point is kinda silly...wait...its hard to hear myself think with the sound of all the exploding abortion clinics.

If its another form...its not Sharia law...hang on...another exploding clinic.

A rose by any other name is still a rose...exploding clinic, that was a big one...but an apple tree is not a rose, even if you call it a rose.

Lets compare the number of women stoned last year to the...damn exploding clinic, aborted fetus all over my suit...number of exploding clinics.

Big one in Cleveland this time, damn, I think a chunk of feminism just landed on my car.

Hey...has anyone considered that maybe its the fetuses that are explosive and not the Christian protestors?

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

Yeah, my wife can hardly even walk out the door to drive herself to her job without some bunch of Muslim men trying to stone her to death. Happens damn near every day around here...

What was your point again?

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 6:31 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
'They' started it, and 'we' will end it.

They'd argue you started it.

Hell, then blame the French, or the Romans. That's how far back the trumped up grievances of some jihadist go back. 100's of yrs before N.America was even colonized by you infidels.

Their arguments are beyond credulity.

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

Friday, May 15, 2009 10:57 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Crusade

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_war

Looks a hell of a lot like a legitimate gripe to me.

Perhaps if we stayed the hell out of their country and quit endlessly fucking with it over the course of a THOUSAND YEARS, maybe they'd not be so pissed off at us.

-F

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

Saturday, May 16, 2009 12:30 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Hell, then blame the French, or the Romans. That's how far back the trumped up grievances of some jihadist go back. 100's of yrs before N.America was even colonized by you infidels.

Their arguments are beyond credulity.

It's true the Clash of civilisations in the region goes back to the Hittite and Canaan Empires and earlier, we're talking 3500 BC and earlier. But those are largely different conflicts, stemming from the same cause. The whole area of Mesopotamia and the 'near east' was a major axis of civilisation, it was an important stop on the silk road, and a place where some of the biggest civilisation of the day were thrown together. It's a point in the worlds social geography that's almost unique, a place where most of the worlds various civilisations and cultures are thrown together, those of Africa, the East and the West.

What I find interesting is how quick you are to dismiss any problem they may have with the US. The US and Britain helped overthrow even the democratically elected government of Iran in the 1950's (look up operation Ajax) and replaced it with a Western friendly, but brutal and oppressive Shah. Then when the Iranian's dare overthrow the US's pet dictator so that they can try and govern themselves, the US reacts by supporting another violent dictator (Saddam Hussein) to attack them and brutalise their people. And then you say that Muslims like those living in Iran have no legitimate gripe with the US? That's but one example of the region, there's brutal regimes in Saudi Arabia, propped up by US money and troops, rightly or wrongly most of the Palestinian civilians killed in Gaza, are killed by bombs and bullets paid for by US tax dollars. Osama Bin Landen says "the US is going to invade an Oil Rich middle eastern nation", and the US invades Iraq right on cue. No matter why you did it, in the eyes of the people he's preaching too, you've just confirmed his argument. US troops have been stationed in various middle eastern countries for decades, and it's not because you want to keep them safe.

It's truly a sign of efficient propaganda that you can say they have no reason to hate the US. You've been spending the better part of at least the last half century punching them in the face, and now they've struck back and you're here whining "what did you do that for, we haven't done anything to you!"

This one sided view, only ever seeing what they do to you, and never stopping to consider what you've done to them, is nationalism, nationalism that led Europe into the First and Second World Wars, and promises to do just as much damage to the US, if not worse, if you don't start thinking about letting it go. While you and them are both concentrating so hard on what they did to you, and ignoring what you did to them, all that you can expect in the region is more of the same. Frankly the "War on Terror", especially the way the US has thus far chosen to propagate it, is a bigger help to the terrorists than any state supplying them with arms. Terrorism is an ideology, ideologies aren't destroyed by bombs, and this particular ideology is strengthened by them. The more of them you kill, the more of them you create.

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

Saturday, May 16, 2009 12:33 AM

America loves a winner!

You're giving credence to the notion that, what happened during the first crusade is in any way a justification for 9/11 ?

There's a loss of connect here, on so MANY levels.

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

Saturday, May 16, 2009 1:01 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Doesn't mean that you still don't have an expansionist empire, just because its not as brutal as the Third Reich. Few empires have been as brutal as that one, which surprisingly only lasted a few years anyway. Maybe you should think about the British Empire, which did a whole lot of building, roads and transport,public building, established justice and democratic government systems, education and so on its empire building. Not all aspects of empire is evil, its just that most peoples eventually get sick of being a dominion and second class citizens.

You'd be better off looking at the Roman empire, which indeed the US government and structure was partly based on. The Roman empire expanded to a great extent, then it's borders became stable, and Roman influence was propagated outside of it's borders largely via client states. I think the Roman Empire with it's Senatorial and Imperial provinces and client states, is a closer historical match to the US, with it's States, territories and satellite states, than Britain that was a colonial trading empire. Rome and the US have conquered territory and then absorbed them, while Britain conquered territory and administered it.

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

Saturday, May 16, 2009 1:11 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Rome and the US have conquered territory and then absorbed them , while Britain conquered territory and administered it.

Yeah, that's exactly what's happened. Only, it's not remotely true.

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

Saturday, May 16, 2009 1:59 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Yeah, that's exactly what's happened. Only, it's not remotely true.

Except it's completely true, your willfull self delusion not withstanding.

Your lack of knowledge of your own history is truly astounding.

April 25, 1846 to February 2, 1848, the Mexican-American war, added California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, parts of Colorado and Wyoming, New Mexico and Texas to the US, through military conquest of Mexico. That's ignoring the various wars against the Indian nations that saw America expand westward. I could also mention the war of 1812, that saw America attempt to annex Canada, luckily the Canadians with very limited help from Britain (since it was fighting Napoleon at the time) out fought the US troops. I suppose since you had your collective arses handed to you by Canadians, a people you are generally so derisive of, I can understand why you'd wish to ignore that part of your history. There's also the Spanish-American war of 1898, that saw the annexation of Puerto Rico, the Philippines and Guam, that remain territories and protectorates of the US to this day.

Much of the current US, it's States and it's territories, were incorporated through conflict with Mexico and the American Natives. Your attempt to claim that isn't so simply by ignoring reality is weak, delusional and simply not true.

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

Saturday, May 16, 2009 4:01 AM