If you like Bush & what he's done to this world, you are evil.
POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Wednesday, July 2, 2008 19:38
VIEWED: 30749
PAGE 2 of 4
Quote:And YOU are BANNED, Fletch, for, uh...for...well I'm not tellin' ya!!!
Originally posted by Fletch2:
To my mind being wrong and telling a lie hinges completely on if the person giving out the information knows it to be false otherwise it's just bad info.
See this virus? It's my BOOMSTICK!!! Now I swear, the next one of you primates, even posts here....
Good, bad, I'm the guy with the spamisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:YOU Rallem, are NOT banned, because you are just too gorram hi-larious.
Originally posted by rallem:
How can they be innocent if they are Muslim? Aren't all Muslims evil God haters?
On an omnipotent-trip Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
OK. I generally love Chris's political views, but something is odd... is anyone else wondering if he's gotten into some new mental state lately?
Sniffing glue maybe?
Ban me, I DARE you LOL!
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:[serious mode]
Originally posted by mal4prez:
Sniffing glue maybe?
How can we have serious political discussions here anyway? It's always no-oh-oh, yes-ess-ess. Facts are irrelevant; it's opinions that dominate. Lies are mis-told truth, and truth is mis-understood lies.
[/serious mode]
You are not banned from this thread Mal, provided you supply me with glue to sniff to make my digestion of AU's position on world politics easier to understand.
isall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ahhh, I've missed you all. Still going at if after all this time. Aurapator drinking the koolaid as usual refusing to believe that a politician would lie to get his way. Bush is a huge liar, not to say that he is alone in that most of the crooks in our body of "government" are. So you are looking for lies spread by Bush, well the yellow cake from Niger was repudiated by Joe Wilson which led to the outing of under cover agent Valerie Plame, which was acknowledged as passing through the office of the president, but you don't remember that? You remember the people who were a boilerplate operation in Iran that were all exposed, which went to trail and the prosecuters were removed by Alberto Gonzales the "torture czar" who became our leader of justice? How maybe you'll counter with "but those weren't proof that Bush did something". So you are tellling me the guy isn't smart enough to have someone take a fall and then pardon his treason, which by all definitions of treason, putting American lives in danger for political reasons falls under.
Bush lies, well do you consider sending information back that does not agree with your personal views on a country or reason for war and not accepting it until it says what you want a lie? Or is that just a constant reevaluation of the facts?
Here's a real easy one. The Bush "ranch". Doesn't a ranch need animals to be a ranch? It would be a lie to call it that otherwise. A very trivial one, but one nonetheless.
Back to real topics. How about the fact that when our budget is put forth by Bush he refuses to disclose the cost of war as part of his budget so that the budget will balance? That's a lie. Hiding the truth is a lie plain and simple.
Ooh, how about no pardons on his watch. He pardoned someone, another lie.
So what is the reason for invading Iraq again?
Is it democracy? WMD's? Saddam's non-existent ties to Al-qaeda? Aluminum tubes? Forward operating bases? Oil security?
What happened to Osama bin Laden, you remember the ass that bombed us? Shouldn't we have finished the job in Afghanistan? I completely supported that war.
Oh Bush is a Christian right? So as a Christian it is okay to ignore the poor, kill, disbelieve in redemption, torture, exploit the Earth, covet money, etc ad nauseum?(sp?)
Just on Republican presidents in general, when is that last republican president who got rid of our debt? Or a better question, who didn't leave us in a recession? In my lifespan, which has been admittedly short, the only time we have not been in recession has been under Clinton. In fact according to some statistics which I don't pretend to understand Democratic control of congress, which apparently has more power than the president has led to more expansion and less decline than republican congress. 8 years of solid downturn are enough for me not to vote for Democrats but against Republicans.
It is choice between the lesser of two evils unfortunately and being a deist, as many of the founding fathers it does not take much to realize that faith based government has no place in our government.
Politics aside I know that there are many issues that conservatives and liberals agree on. Personally I am for increased border security with Mexico and a worker visa program that allows for taxes to be paid, set wages and possibility to have faster citizenship for the worker and their family. I am for revised welfare system, the encourages you to work and requires mandatory community service work so that you are not just getting a hand out. The most ridiculous thing I have ever heard is my uncle being told that he did not qualify for food stamps because he made too much money after taxes and child support. He made about $50/wk after all that. So he was told to quit his job so that he could receive full benefits. Dumb dumb dumb.
Auraptor I know you are a somewhat intelligent individual, but you know that in order for anyone to make the white house they have to have lied their ass off. Bush knows how to surround himself with people very well. He has consistently
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Bush lies, well do you consider sending information back that does not agree with your personal views on a country or reason for war and not accepting it until it says what you want a lie? Or is that just a constant reevaluation of the facts?
????
Quote:
Here's a real easy one. The Bush "ranch". Doesn't a ranch need animals to be a ranch? It would be a lie to call it that otherwise. A very trivial one, but one nonetheless.
A ranch could be "rancho" meaning camp or small farm, or a holiday resort offering ranch activities (riding and camping) or a style of house.
Quote:
Back to real topics. How about the fact that when our budget is put forth by Bush he refuses to disclose the cost of war as part of his budget so that the budget will balance? That's a lie. Hiding the truth is a lie plain and simple.
He itemize the amount of the budget it will take to run the Military
Quote:
So what is the reason for invading Iraq again?
Is it democracy? WMD's? Saddam's non-existent ties to Al-qaeda? Aluminum tubes? Forward operating bases? Oil security?
You forgot revenge, but there were camps like Salman Pak which were used for the training of Terrorists which were ended with the invasion of Iraq. Also I would like to point out that President Bush had been pretty consistent on stating his desire to spread a modern nation of Democracy in the Middle East for its neighbors to emulate.
Quote:
Oh Bush is a Christian right? So as a Christian it is okay to ignore the poor, kill, disbelieve in redemption, torture, exploit the Earth, covet money, etc ad nauseum?(sp?)
Being a Christian or calling oneself a Christian does not mean you are a perfect person.
Quote:
Just on Republican presidents in general, when is that last republican president who got rid of our debt? Or a better question, who didn't leave us in a recession? In my lifespan, which has been admittedly short, the only time we have not been in recession has been under Clinton. In fact according to some statistics which I don't pretend to understand Democratic control of congress, which apparently has more power than the president has led to more expansion and less decline than republican congress. 8 years of solid downturn are enough for me not to vote for Democrats but against Republicans.
Actually the word recession is being used too liberally here and the only times a recession were felt in my lifetime which isn't as short as yours I think were from President Carter, (Democrat) and President George H. Bush at the end of his term the entire world was in a recession which the Democrats had successfully pinned on him but as it turns out the United State's economy while in a recession was much better than the rest of the world's economy. I would like to point out that President Clinton ran his economy exactly like a Republican would in his first term of Service and was heavily criticized for it by his Democratic peers and that while I am not sure if we were in a recession at the end of his eight years our economy was in a down turn. I would also like to point out that an economy just like almost everything else runs like a sine wave and there cannot be an upturn without there being a down.
Quote:
It is choice between the lesser of two evils unfortunately and being a deist, as many of the founding fathers it does not take much to realize that faith based government has no place in our government.
The term separation of church and state was coined by Thomas Jefferson but he and our other forefathers were not the original minds who made up this concept and it was Martin Luther who wrote of two separate kingdoms during his push for Protestant reform. Even then I cannot say it was Martin Luther who thought up this concept, because I believe that Jesus Christ said something like “Give unto God which is God’s and unto Caesar which is Caesar’s,” but that is irrelevant, because while there is a stated separation of church and state that does not mean a separation of Church from State o
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
He itemize the amount of the budget it will take to run the Military
He do? Then why he keep going back to Congress demanding (not requesting, but DEMANDING, as if they owe him) more money to throw into that hellhole that he created in Iraq? And why does he keep referring to it as "emergency" spending? We've been in this ridiculous war for over 5 years now - do you still think sudden emergencies are cropping up every 3-4 months that require another $80-120 billion?
Quote:
Also I would like to point out that President Bush had been pretty consistent on stating his desire to spread a modern nation of Democracy in the Middle East for its neighbors to emulate.
How's that workin' out for ya? Let's see, we have the Palestinians electing Hamas to represent them - in elections which weren't disputed as being faked or rigged - and in response to that "democracy" the US has simply refused to acknowledge or speak to Hamas representatives.
We have a puppet regime which we installed in Iraq, and every time they try to flex a little muscle and show some free will, we shut them down and shut them up, and continue to ram our own policies down their "democracy".
Quote:
Being a Christian or calling oneself a Christian does not mean you are a perfect person.
But apparently it gives you a pass on even being a DECENT person. Once you slap on that "Christian" label (and a cute little flag lapel button), you feel like you can do anything you want, because you're "forgiven". Calling yourself a Christian might not mean that you are a perfect person, but it SHOULD mean that you're damn well TRYING to be a BETTER person!
Quote:
I would also like to point out that an economy just like almost everything else runs like a sine wave and there cannot be an upturn without there being a down.
Ah, but we seldom hear that during the upturn, do we? What we get are these horseshit predictions about how, if things continue at this pace, we'll have nickels piled to the moon in three weeks, and other such gibberish. What DOESN'T get pointed out is that things DON'T continue at this pace, because they can't, because it's a cyclical thing. Now, if you scroll around the archives, you'll find posts about how "the economy's on fire!" and "despite doom-n-gloomers, economy continues to roll" - where the Bush supporters didn't care to point out that (a) the President has very little real impact on the economy, but gets most of the blame when it goes to shit because "the buck stops here" as the man said, and (b) the Republican model of deficit-spending can only keep so many balls in the air for so long. It's a juggling act, it's smoke and mirrors - it's like me going out and buying millions of dollars worth of crap that I don't need and can't afford, just to APPEAR as if I'm much richer than I actually am.
No thought is ever given to HOW we're going to pay this off, or WHEN we're going to pay this off. Democrats get so much crap hurled at them for traditionally being the party that raises taxes, but it never once gets pointed out that ANYONE who follows someone like Reagan or Dubya is going to HAVE TO raise taxes - not to pay for new programs or increase existing programs, just to pay off the massive amounts of debt incurred by those who were trying to give a false sense of how great their economies were doing.
Quote:
...while there is a stated separation of church and state that does not mean a separation of Church from State or visa versa.
???? But that's exactly what it DOES mean! The Founding Fathers, while they may have been "christian", were certainly not your modern brand of fundamentalist Bible-thumping religious zealot. Their belief in a Creator was more in line with the beliefs of the Indians, that there was a Great Spirit of the world. Many of them warned specifically against the corrosive influence of those who would use Christ as their weapon. While they may have had their beliefs, they were adamant that such beliefs should not be forced on anyone, and that no "offi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Rallem as a quick clarification for your confusion, the Bush administration would receive information from intelligence that it did not agree with, so they would not accept that information, send it back and tell the analysts that the information was not correct and to redo it, kind of like a teacher who makes up the answers as they go along.
Bush's "ranch" fits none of the descriptions you gave, it is neither a small camp or farm, he has no animals and it is not a ranch style of house.
Kwicko covered most of the other ones. However I would like to elaborate saying if a Democrat can run a republican style economy better than a Republican that should be a warning flag for the Republican's right? Clinton got rid of the deficit while maintaining programs for the poor. We are now in MASSIVE debt and have become less secure as a result of it due to our reliance on foreign money from China.
http://arts.bev.net/roperldavid/politics/RecessionDemRep.htm
That would be one of my sources which explained things in straight numbers for me. Again, not an expert on economics, so just putting it out there as validation of my own personal experiences.
When there are no heroes where will we turn?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
This country is made up of my kind, your kind and every kind, my point was simply were do you get the rite to call me call me and my kind evil? When you think about it you are prejudgeing me, we've never met so that makes you and your kind "BIGOTS" You think I'm evil becase I do'nt agree with you?
M'kay... refresh my memory - where exactly did I refer to you specifically as evil?
Let's clarify: Bush is evil. By extension, those who STILL support him are evil. You brought up the Nazis; at the beginning, the supporters of the Third Reich might not necessarily have been evil, just misguided in their nationalistic zeal ("Support Our Troops!" "Let's Roll" "These Colors Don't Run!" and so on) and misused by a manipulative regime. But after about 1943 or so, it should have been clearly evident for anyone with a free mind and a little critical thinking that Hitler and his Reich were truly, monstrously evil. Those who still ardently supported him at that point were, in fact, evil. To maintain otherwise is simply to blind yourself to the facts.
You maintain that FDR sent troops to Europe, thus making him evil by our logic. Small but important point of fact: FDR tried to stay OUT of WWII as long as possible, and American only entered the war in the European Theatre AFTER Germany had declared war on the United States. Look it up; it's all true. Japan attacked at Pearl Harbor, the US declared war on Japan, and because of treaties signed between Japan, Germany, and Italy (the "Axis" powers), Germany was obligated to declare war on the United States if the US declared war on either of the other Axis partners. Once war was declared on us by Germany, we sent over as many troops as we could.
So tell me again exactly when Iraq declared war on the United States, forcing us to send troops there? Hint: It wasn't on September 11, 2001.
Secondly, and I bring this up only to help you - run stuff through a spell-check now and again, PLEASE! The only thing that posting run-on sentences and horribly constructed contractions is going to do is make you appear less worthy of any kind of response, because it makes you appear less intelligent than you are.
A contraction is a shortening of two or more words into a single word. The letter or letters that are removed are replaced by an apostrophe (or sometimes more than one). The apostrophe replaces the removed letter or letters.
Examples:
I am = I'm
Does not = doesn't
Are not = aren't
Is not = isn't
I have not - I'ven't (although I've never heard anyone but Colin Firth use that one, as in, "I'ven't the foggiest" - I haven't the foggiest idea what you mean)
I point this out only because it's a consistent mis-usage by you on these boards, so I'm trying to clarify it in your mind. On another thread, you stated that having "only" a high school education, maybe you weren't smart enough to be here. Only you can judge whether you're smart enough to be here, but for the record, I have LESS than a high school education; I dropped out. But just because I quit school in no way means that I quit *LEARNING*. Grammar and punctuation were among my worst subjects. Luckily, I'm a voracious reader, so I tended to pick up a lot of the rules through extended exposure to them. Osmosis, you might say... :)
You're smart enough to be here, you're smart enough to debate issues, just try to communicate a little more clearly, and you'll tend to be taken a little more seriously.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Bush's "ranch" fits none of the descriptions you gave, it is neither a small camp or farm, he has no animals and it is not a ranch style of house
I doubt anyone ever figured the President to be living in a place like this !
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The "ranch" thing really isn't an issue to any Texan. Everybody down here who has two acres and a double-wide refers to it as their "ranch". Makes 'em sound bigger and better than they really are, puffs 'em up, and embraces that old stereotype about Texans all living on ranches, herding cattle, and hanging rustlers.
Call it a colloquialism, a regional thing. My granddad in Nebraska had some 12,000 acres which he farmed (he didn't "ranch" it, he farmed it); he raised cattle, chickens, alfalfa, corn, and wheat (and hemp during WWII, because his country needed it), and he did so for 60 years, but he never once referred to his land as a "ranch" or to himself as a "rancher" because he thought that would sound arrogant. He was a farmer all his life, and he died on his farm, in his farm house.
If he were in Texas, he'd have been a rancher.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Mike, all these quotes you claim are " misleading " are nothing more than OPINION !! These aren't FACTS. If the President is told by his CIA director that the case against Saddam and WMD is a " slam dunk ", wtf is the President suppose to do ? Tell the American public that his top intelligence man said one thing, but I'm just not too certain there's anything to worry about here. Even though every single Democrat leader has been saying Saddam has WMD and we must not allow him to use them again, , even though there were 17 U.N. Resolutions against Iraq , even though there were agreements from the 1st Gulf War which were broken, even though there were missing WMD materials - catalogued by the UNITED NATIONS THEMSELVES, even though all this was going on and a HELL of a lot more that's not even been reported,..... you STILL want to take the position that.....meh, there's nothing to all these things. Maybe we should roll over and go back to sleep? ( Like we did for the previous 8 yrs ??? ) Sorry, but the one legitimate thing Bush has done in his terms in office is to protect the United States, its interest and the interest of many other countries.
Them's the facts, whether you want to accept them or not.
Actually, them's ain't the facts - those are just mere opinions!
YOU say that "everybody knew" that Saddam had WMD, and that the intel agencies of every nation knew it. Again, nothing but opinion. Not even our own intelligence agencies had any real, solid evidence that Saddam had any WMD, nor did they "know" he had them - it was the OPINION of SOME within those industries that he PROBABLY had them. At best, they ESTIMATED that he might have them.
So you have yet to offer one single FACT that he ever had them.
You say Bush's statements weren't misleading, but that it's the OPINION of the United States House of Representatives that they're misleading (or lies, in simpler terms). Okay, I say the only thing Bush ever offered for justification for the war was his OPINIONS - or worse, the opinions of others - with no factual, solid evidence to back them up, only more "opinions". You're saying that because he simply repeated what he was told, without ever trying to verify it with any other sources, that he wasn't "lying".
I've gotta ask - which comforts you less? The idea that your President is a liar, or the idea that he's nothing but a talking head, a puppet for liars?
You've stated that if Bush was told something that was wrong, and he repeated it without checking it out for himself, then HE wasn't lying. Okay, I'll play. Let's say that I'm told the world is flat. I don't have the resources to go to orbit to see for myself, or to sail around it to see if I end up where I started. From my perspective as I stand on a piece of seemingly flat ground, that statement makes sense, and I repeat it to any and all who will listen.
Does that make me a liar?
Your options for Bush are pretty narrow: Either he's a liar, or he's a fool who listens only to opinions that reinforce what he already thinks. Neither makes for a very good leader...
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
According to AwwCrapper's logic, none of these statements are facts. The fact that they were made by Bush is true, but the statements themselves are nothing more than opinions, which were proven wrong.
Public Statement of President George W. Bush:
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
Source: President Delivers "State of the Union", White House (1/28/2003).
Public Statement of President George W. Bush:
"He said he wouldn't have chemical weapons, he's got them."
Source: Remarks by the President at Arkansas Welcome, White House (11/4/2002).
Public Statement of President George W. Bush:
"Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons."
Source: President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat; Remarks by the President on Iraq, White House (10/7/2002).
Public Statement of President George W. Bush:
"If the Iraq regime is able to produce, buy, or steal an amount of highly enriched uranium a little larger than a single softball, it could have a nuclear weapon in less than one year."
Source: President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat; Remarks by the President on Iraq, White House (10/7/2002).
Public Statement of President George W. Bush:
"Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof - the smoking gun - that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud."
Source: President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat; Remarks by the President on Iraq, White House (10/7/2002).
Public Statement of President George W. Bush:
"In defiance of the United Nations, Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons."
Source: President: Iraqi Regime Danger to America is "Grave and Growing", White House (10/5/2002).
Remember, Kiddies, any statement of fact that you don't agree with can be dismissed with a wave of your hand as "only an OPINION".
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
He do? Then why he keep going back to Congress demanding (not requesting, but DEMANDING, as if they owe him) more money to throw into that hellhole that he created in Iraq? And why does he keep referring to it as "emergency" spending? We've been in this ridiculous war for over 5 years now - do you still think sudden emergencies are cropping up every 3-4 months that require another $80-120 billion?
That money is allocated to the Military no matter how the Newscasters try to portray it.
Quote:
How's that workin' out for ya? Let's see, we have the Palestinians electing Hamas to represent them - in elections which weren't disputed as being faked or rigged - and in response to that "democracy" the US has simply refused to acknowledge or speak to Hamas representatives.
We have a puppet regime which we installed in Iraq, and every time they try to flex a little muscle and show some free will, we shut them down and shut them up, and continue to ram our own policies down their "democracy".
Firstly, the Palestinian State is an entirely different problem with shades of connectivity to Iraq. Secondly, can you please provide some instances where we shut down Iraqi policies? Thirdly, I think the process of incorporating the plans laid out by the Commander in Chief has been flawed and in hindsight 20/20 perhaps we should have taken the Iraqi Government over completely like we did in Japan and in Germany and only relinquish control over a certain sector of the Government after it had been fully trained and demonstrated that it could manage its job. Perhaps then the Iraqis would have that Medicine and dependable electricity they so need.
Quote:
But apparently it gives you a pass on even being a DECENT person. Once you slap on that "Christian" label (and a cute little flag lapel button), you feel like you can do anything you want, because you're "forgiven". Calling yourself a Christian might not mean that you are a perfect person, but it SHOULD mean that you're damn well TRYING to be a BETTER person!
What you call yourself or what lapel button you where matters not to God and it is up to him on your judgement day. It is not for me to Judge him as it is not for me to judge you.
Quote:
Ah, but we seldom hear that during the upturn, do we? What we get are these horseshit predictions about how, if things continue at this pace, we'll have nickels piled to the moon in three weeks, and other such gibberish. What DOESN'T get pointed out is that things DON'T continue at this pace, because they can't, because it's a cyclical thing. Now, if you scroll around the archives, you'll find posts about how "the economy's on fire!" and "despite doom-n-gloomers, economy continues to roll" - where the Bush supporters didn't care to point out that (a) the President has very little real impact on the economy, but gets most of the blame when it goes to shit because "the buck stops here" as the man said, and (b) the Republican model of deficit-spending can only keep so many balls in the air for so long. It's a juggling act, it's smoke and mirrors - it's like me going out and buying millions of dollars worth of crap that I don't need and can't afford, just to APPEAR as if I'm much richer than I actually am.
No thought is ever given to HOW we're going to pay this off, or WHEN we're going to pay this off. Democrats get so much crap hurled at them for traditionally being the party that raises taxes, but it never once gets pointed out that ANYONE who follows someone like Reagan or Dubya is going to HAVE TO raise taxes - not to pay for new programs or increase existing programs, just to pay off the massive amounts of debt incurred by those who were trying to give a false sense of how great their economies were doing.
We do seldom here of how the economy will sour sometime in the near future because of it being cyclic, but that is no politicians fault.
Actually we don't even need income taxes to pay off our debt, because the Government gets so little of its financing through the income tax and
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Salman Pak was not used to train Terrorists, a fact the CIA was aware of. Also after the invasion it was determined that Salman Pak was used to train counter-terrorism units.
Originally posted by rallem:
You forgot revenge, but there were camps like Salman Pak which were used for the training of Terrorists which were ended with the invasion of Iraq.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
You say Bush's statements weren't misleading, but that it's the OPINION of the United States House of Representatives that they're misleading
Wrong. These very same folks who were saying 1 thing prior to the war flip flopped for pure political expediency when it suited them to do so. So if the members of the House or Senate plays politics, you're going to completely ignore what they said before ? Sorry, it doesn't work that way.
It bothers me most that folks , who said EXACTLY the same thing as The President , are now ignoring their own words and calling him a liar. THAT's what really gets me pissed off.
Quote:Problem w/ your scenario, is that it's wrong. The President DID ask for more clarification to make sure the intel was right, he DIDN'T blindly take Tenent's word and assume it was a "slam dunk " .
ou've stated that if Bush was told something that was wrong, and he repeated it without checking it out for himself, then HE wasn't lying.
My opinions of Bush are that he's every bit the leader as Clinton ( Bill and Hillary ) , Ted Kennedy, Al Gore, John Kerry, Sandy Berger, Madeiline Albright, and a host of other Democrats who sided w/ Bush's position on Iraq, even before he was in OFFICE !!
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Prepare a funeral for your computer AU.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Prepare a funeral for your computer AU.
Fascist! Fascist ! Repressin' the truth, you are !!
Help Help! I'm being repressed!!
Hey, where's my Fiona clone ??
You're nothing but a low down , double crossin' deceiver !
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Don't worry AU, Chris's computer FU is not strong. That's why he's getting me to do it :P
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Fascist! Fascist ! Repressin' the truth, you are !!
Help Help! I'm being repressed!!
Hey, where's my Fiona clone ??
You're nothing but a low down , double crossin' deceiver !
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Problem w/ your scenario, is that it's wrong. The President DID ask for more clarification to make sure the intel was right, he DIDN'T blindly take Tenent's word and assume it was a "slam dunk "
Wrong. According to CIA records, George Tenet sent TWO memos up the chain (one to Condi Rice), explaining that the Niger intel was highly suspect and considered by the agency to be "highly dubious", and that he SHOULD NOT USE IT IN HIS SPEECHES.
He was ignored by one and all.
I know you like to blame it entirely on him, and Tenet will even accept his part of the blame (proving that he's not a Republican in the process), but according to Tenet, the "slam dunk" remark was him making the case that we needed more investigation and vetting. He says that us needing more corroboration was a "slam dunk" - not that Saddam having WMD was. So far, his is the only account of that conversation that has been committed to paper, so unless we have a transcript of Oval Office tapes of the day, we may never know if he's telling the truth or not.
But Tenet DOES claim an amount of responsibility for many of the failures of 9/11 and after - something Bush has NEVER done (even claiming in one interview not to have made any mistakes).
So whose account rings truer? Oh, I'm sorry... whose OPINION rings more true?
Quote:
So if the members of the House or Senate plays politics, you're going to completely ignore what they said before ? Sorry, it doesn't work that way.
Keep that in mind. I expect you to live up to that as this campaign rolls on. How many things has McCain said before that he is now utterly contradicting, doing a complete 180-degree flip-flop on?
Quote:
My opinions of Bush are that he's every bit the leader as Clinton ( Bill and Hillary ) , Ted Kennedy, Al Gore, John Kerry, Sandy Berger, Madeiline Albright, and a host of other Democrats...
And given your past statements about them and their leadership, I guess that means you REALLY hate Bush. As such, you must be an "America-hater".
Mike
My opinions of Bush are that he's every bit the leader as Clinton ( Bill and Hillary ) , Ted Kennedy, Al Gore, John Kerry, Sandy Berger, Madeiline Albright, and a host of other Democrats... - AuRaptor, Real World Events Discussions
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Thanks pal- I didn't know if ya wanted AU to know...
Originally posted by citizen:
Don't worry AU, Chris's computer FU is not strong. That's why he's getting me to do it :P
isall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Salman Pak was not used to train Terrorists, a fact the CIA was aware of. Also after the invasion it was determined that Salman Pak was used to train counter-terrorism units.
No it was not used for that, but there were other camps very much like Salma Pak which were used for Terrorist training
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/550k
mbzd.asp
From the Weekly Standard
Quote:
THE FORMER IRAQI REGIME OF Saddam Hussein trained thousands of radical Islamic terrorists from the region at camps in Iraq over the four years immediately preceding the U.S. invasion, according to documents and photographs recovered by the U.S. military in postwar Iraq. The existence and character of these documents has been confirmed to THE WEEKLY STANDARD by eleven U.S. government officials.
The secret training took place primarily at three camps--in Samarra, Ramadi, and Salman Pak--and was directed by elite Iraqi military units. Interviews by U.S. government interrogators with Iraqi regime officials and military leaders corroborate the documentary evidence. Many of the fighters were drawn from terrorist groups in northern Africa with close ties to al Qaeda, chief among them Algeria's GSPC and the Sudanese Islamic Army. Some 2,000 terrorists were trained at these Iraqi camps each year from 1999 to 2002, putting the total number at or above 8,000. Intelligence officials believe that some of these terrorists returned to Iraq and are responsible for attacks against Americans and Iraqis. According to three officials with knowledge of the intelligence on Iraqi training camps, White House and National Security Council officials were briefed on these findings in May 2005; senior Defense Department officials subsequently received the same briefing.
The photographs and documents on Iraqi training camps come from a collection of some 2 million "exploitable items" captured in postwar Iraq and Afghanistan. They include handwritten notes, typed documents, audiotapes, videotapes, compact discs, floppy discs, and computer hard drives. Taken together, this collection could give U.S.
intelligence officials and policymakers an inside look at the activities of the former Iraqi regime in the months and years before the Iraq war.
The discovery of the information on jihadist training camps in Iraq would seem to have two major consequences: It exposes the flawed assumptions of the experts and U.S. intelligence officials who told us for years that a secularist like Saddam Hussein would never work with Islamic radicals, any more than such jihadists would work with an infidel like the Iraqi dictator. It also reminds us that valuable information remains buried in the mountain of documents recovered in Afghanistan and Iraq over the past four years.
Nearly three years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, only 50,000 of these 2 million "exploitable items" have been thoroughly examined. That's 2.5 percent. Despite the hard work of the individuals assigned to the "DOCEX" project, the process is not moving quickly enough, says Michael Tanji, a former Defense Intelligence Agency official who helped lead the document exploitation effort for 18 months. "At this rate," he says, "if we continue to approach DOCEX in a linear fashion, our great-grandchildren will still be sorting through this stuff."
Most of the 50,000 translated documents relate directly to weapons of mass destruction programs and scientists, since David Kay and his Iraq Survey Group--who were among the first to analyze the finds--considered those items top priority. "At first, if it wasn't WMD, it wasn't translated. It wasn't exploited," says a former military intelligence officer who worked on the documents in Iraq.
http://swyzzlestyx.com/index.html
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's funny how Iraq was training radical islamic terrorists, when as a secular government the radical islamic terrorists were gunning for iraq. It's kinda like if the US funded and trained Osama Bin Landen, oh, that actually happened didn't it. Ok, it's like if the US funded and trained the Taliban, ok, again, bad example...
But lets take the article head on:
"The secret training took place primarily at three camps--in Samarra, Ramadi, and Salman Pak"
Salman Pak, you conceed, was not used for such purpose, so I assume I don't need to prove it. So we have Samarra and Ramadi.
In the case of Samarra, I find nothing. I've not heard of it before, I admit, so I googled it. With the search "Samarra Terrorist Camp", I got nothing, the closest being news reports of the post invasion terrorist attacks on a mosque in the town of Samarra. So I see that as suspect at best.
Ramadi is much the same story. The only mention of Terrorist camps comes from the "Weekly Standard", which seems to have plucked the accusation from thin air.
So the main Terrorist training centres are "Salman Pak", which even the CIA knew wasn't, "Samarra" and "Ramadi" which seems to have no mention anywhere beyond the "Weekly Standards" seemingly unsupported editorial. The very fact that Samarra and Ramadi are mentioned in the same breath as Salman Pak bring them in to question, the fact that there seems to be no corroborating evidence seals the deal for me.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ahhhh, but it was in the Weakly Standard, that bastion of "fair-n-balanced-ness" owned by NewsCorpse, who famously bring you other right-wing crap like Faux News and the New York Post.
But it was "confirmed by eleven officials".
Sorry, I need better proof. All you've provided, as AwwCrapper always says, are "opinions".
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
In the case of Samarra, I find nothing. I've not heard of it before, I admit, so I googled it. With the search "Samarra Terrorist Camp", I got nothing, the closest being news reports of the post invasion terrorist attacks on a mosque in the town of Samarra. So I see that as suspect at best.
Ramadi is much the same story. The only mention of Terrorist camps comes from the "Weekly Standard", which seems to have plucked the accusation from thin air.
Oh, Cit, you silly - don't you know that Google is a left-biased search engine?
;)
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So, when Tenent says to Bush, it's a slam dunk, you say Bush is lying. But when Bush wants to point out that OTHER intelligence agencies have their own view on things, Tenent is suddenly 100% correct, trust worthy and his words are pure gold ?
See " inconsistent " in the dictionary, if you will.
And no, the 'slam dunk' remark was about Iraq having wmds, not that we needed more vetting. That's nothing but back peddling to cover one's tracks.
Bush is an odd cat. He'll not place blame on anyone, even when it's clear that they're to blame. He has come out and said mistakes were made, but only in so much as how things were done, not w/ the decisions made to GO to war.
Keeping Tenent, when clearly he should have been replaced , was part of W's plan to reach out and show the Dems and lifers in D.C. that he wanted to do things different. It only ended up costing him.
I'm not talking campaign promises, but specific comments about Iraq, Saddam and WMD. Dems who were all for taking action before suddenly flip flop after the insurgency starts up, things aren't going so well, and they've all forgotten who it was that was FOR this war in the beginning.
And I'd expect you to conveniently overlook the FACT that EVERYONE from Clinton, Kennedy, Kerry and so on were saying Saddams WMD program had to be stopped , as far back as 1998.
UNDERSTAND THIS - It's impossible for Bush to have been lying about Iraq if the DEMOCRATS SAID IT FIRST!
you keep THAT in mind, why don't ya ?
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
So, when Tenent says to Bush, it's a slam dunk, you say Bush is lying. But when Bush wants to point out that OTHER intelligence agencies have their own view on things, Tenent is suddenly 100% correct, trust worthy and his words are pure gold ?
You must have a problem with reading comprehension. Read my words again:
Quote:
I know you like to blame it entirely on him, and Tenet will even accept his part of the blame (proving that he's not a Republican in the process), but according to Tenet, the "slam dunk" remark was him making the case that we needed more investigation and vetting. He says that us needing more corroboration was a "slam dunk" - not that Saddam having WMD was. So far, his is the only account of that conversation that has been committed to paper, so unless we have a transcript of Oval Office tapes of the day, we may never know if he's telling the truth or not.
But Tenet DOES claim an amount of responsibility for many of the failures of 9/11 and after - something Bush has NEVER done (even claiming in one interview not to have made any mistakes).
So whose account rings truer? Oh, I'm sorry... whose OPINION rings more true?
100% true? Pure gold? Hardly. I pointed out that TENET (his name is George Tenet, NOT "Tenent" - apparently you have a writing comprehension problem as well) gave HIS account of it, and other than Bob Woodward's, it's the only account we've got on record.
You seem to be saying that Bob Woodward's word on this matter is 100% true, pure gold. Is that the case?
Quote:
UNDERSTAND THIS - It's impossible for Bush to have been lying about Iraq if the DEMOCRATS SAID IT FIRST!
"Impossible"? What if they were lying (er, I mean "passing along wrong information" since those are clearly not the same thing, as you've so often asserted)? If they were wrong, and Bush repeats it, does him saying it automatically make it right?
Quote:
And I'd expect you to conveniently overlook the FACT that EVERYONE from Clinton, Kennedy, Kerry and so on were saying Saddams WMD program had to be stopped , as far back as 1998.
Everyone. Every single member of the House and the Senate. Not a single one of them was against the war? You state that as a clearcut, undeniable FACT. And for the record, saying "Saddam's WMD programs must be stopped" is not the same as saying "We must invade Iraq, NOW!" If it were, we'd already have invaded North Korea, Pakistan, and Iran. We haven't, so I have to conclude that wanting a program to cease and invading a nation aren't exactly the same thing.
So YOU keep THAT in mind, why dontcha.
Although I do see that you've moderated your position on Bush's lies. You now accept that he IS a liar, but you've narrowed your focus only to the prelude to the invasion of Iraq. I *guess* that counts as some sort of progress...
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
It's impossible for Bush to have been lying about Iraq if the DEMOCRATS SAID IT FIRST!
So if I were to say that the Holocaust never happened, that wouldn't be a lie in your view, because others like Ahmedinejad said it first, thereby making it TRUE when I say it. Is that how logic works in your flawed little brain?
After all, how do *I* absolutely know with any certainty that it did happen? I wasn't there, I haven't talked to any survivors or camp guards, so I have no firsthand knowledge of it being "real"...
(For the record, I know the Holocaust happened. I'm using it to point out the absurdity of the argument 'Crapper's put forth.)
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The thing about the ranch comment is that it was a lie, an exaggeration is still a lie, albeit a small one, I lived in Texas for two years while I was in the Army and I married a Texas woman, believe me I know all about Texas...However the fact stands that an exaggeration is a lie.
Kwicko there is some basis to the idea that Google is at least favorable to the Jewish community, try Googling Jew. It comes up for the number one search that they are offended by their results! That said there is no way for a robot to be left or right.
Auraptor Tenet doesn't need to be in the picture if you don't want him to be. Joe Wilson, the ambassador to Niger stated that there was no yellow cake uranium coming from Niger, the French were in control of the mines, and they were not about to Give Saddam nuclear capability. There was no indication whatsoever of the existence of any nuclear capability. This is fact, someone went to jail over it and Bush pardoned him. That's right Bush pardoned a traitor, once again I am alluding to the Valerie Plame incident.
Moving on as there should really be no debate about that issue anymore. There was evidence of Saddam using poison gas and other horrific weapons on his own people, these weapons were ahem...of American build sad to say. There was no longer any proof of him having them. The only person who said otherwise was "Curveball" an Iraqi defector, who's testimony was questionable at best. He was a drunk (Alcohol is a no-no for Muslims), and was being paid for information. His testimony was disregarded by the non-Us government that he worked for and the office of the president when they were told this told the analysts to take another look at the evidence for a war in Iraq. This information was released all over the internet and television sources, even I believe to a piece on Fox news. The act of having analysts look over old evidence is not normal procedure. It is called data mining. This means the the information as not allowed to get to congress or the president without first saying what it was supposed to say to jive with an already pre-conceived decision that was made.
So I ask you as I believe Kwicko asked, is the president a lackey or a leader? If he is the leader choosing to cover himself as any good politician would do, then he is good enough to cover his tracks. However, the people whom he chose to surround himself with were all people he was aware were neo-cons, many who were part of PNAC, a group that openly stated they were hoping for a "Pearl Harbor like event" that would allow a faster ability to create permanent basis in the middle east as forward operating bases. They admit that freely. Or is the president some duped idiot going along with what he is told. As scary as it is I'd rather go with the first option.
Oh just a point of note,as far as the Dems flip-flopping, the information that they wre given was cherry picked and many of the same information that the president had seen have been omitted from what was sent to congress for security reasons. In other words they were only shown what they were supposed to see so that they would be in favor of the war. After the actual facts had been released, such as the war would be a long drawn out war, the information to go to war had come from a known unreliable source, there was no uranium, etc. Of course they were going to change their position, not to mention that the dems tried very early on to bring the troops back, but were told that by allowing war in Afghanistan, they had authorized war wherever the president needed to go in the war on terror. I know you remember what I am talking about. Not to mention that when Bush did go in he did not listen to Gen. Shinseki, and forced him to resign because he advised against the president's plan.
Speaking of random memories about Bush I just remembered a few odd things. Remember when he choked on a pretzel? Or how about the time a protester threw a live grenade on the stage he was at but it didn't go off. This guy has got to have a horseshoe up his butt or somethi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
When there are no heroes where will we turn?[/
How many of you are Vet's ? Anyone serve in Iraq?
I did . I saw what the Iraqi people had to put up with and I am glad that we liberated them .
People seem to forget 9/11. Just like in Firefly,
people forgot Serenity Valley.It's okay to have opinions on politicks but to say people are evil just because they do not agree with you is wrong.
To answer the question above, the answer is ourselfs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
please do not try to question my loyalty, I served my country same as you...serenity valley is a horrible analogy. The US is not some rebel band of people, We are the central planets enforcing our beliefs on another country. No one is saying we don't value the troops, however, we as a country are having torture done in our name openly, we as a country have invaded another country on false premise, multiple ones actually the latest being to spread our civilization to the Iraqi's. Might I also remind you that 9/11 and Iraq have absolutely nothing in common. Saddam did not harbor terrorist nor did he attack us, but hey we got him..now where the hell is Osama? You remember the guy who orchestrated the attacks on us? How about the war in Afghanistan, forgot about that did you? I like most Americans were for that. So before you try to guilt trip another veteran, shut up and get your facts straight, I lost too many good friends for that prick's lies.
To the rest of you I apologize for my language and you know I am tolerant of many other views, but ignorant guilt tripping is not something I tolerate. If you believe in Bush and his war don't cry to me about Iraq. It sucks and you shouldn't be over there. I have been against it from the beginning, have never supported it. Wrong time, wrong plan. If anything we did(and I hate to make this comparison but it is only meant as a military strategy comparison, not an ethical one) we are doing what caused a major problem in the Germans plans in WW2. Fighting a battle on more than one front in unfavorable territory.
So no I will not support Bush's war. It has nothing to do with 9/11, nothing. Saddam had done zilch to us, stop listening to fox, as any good browncoat should know they are evil and read a damned newspaper, or try getting something from real news channels, you know the ones who actual give facts and not opinion.
You are absolutely right about my quote though. The answer is ourselves. So get out of lockstep and become a little independent.
When there are no heroes where will we turn?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Everyone. Every single member of the House and the Senate. Not a single one of them was against the war? You state that as a clearcut, undeniable FACT. And for the record, saying "Saddam's WMD programs must be stopped" is not the same as saying "We must invade Iraq, NOW!" If it were, we'd already have invaded North Korea, Pakistan, and Iran. We haven't, so I have to conclude that wanting a program to cease and invading a nation aren't exactly the same thing.
Saddam HAS a WMD program before the war and then lamely trying to claim you were duped by the intelligence, and that Bush some how lied is the weakest excuse out there, yet almost all Democrats who were for the war, said Saddam had to be stopped, how ever the hell you want to put it, who now are running from their previous position, and the only thing that's changed is who sits in the White House.
That's all that needs to be said on the matter, MIKE.
Quote:
Although I do see that you've moderated your position on Bush's lies. You now accept that he IS a liar, but you've narrowed your focus only to the prelude to the invasion of Iraq. I *guess* that counts as some sort of progress...
The issue has always been regarding the absurd claims that Bush ' lied us " into Iraq. I'm not "narrowing down " anything, as the focus has always BEEN about the prelude to Iraq. Enough w/ these fallacies in your argument, o.k. ? Those who wave their signs or slap idiot slogans on their bumper stickers that " Bush lied, people died " have it 100% wrong. He didn't lie, per Iraq. He may have gotten some things wrong, may have stuck w/ Rumsfeld too long and stood by failing tactics, but there's never been a war where some of that hasn't gone on. Ever. Only those who hate this President or his policies are going to exaggerate his failures and ignore any successes which occur. Which would be o.k., except when in times like these, the net out come is to vilify the troops and try to promote the notion that what they're doing is based on lies ( it isn't ) and that what we've lost 1000's of troops for is a worthless cause ( again, it's far from the case )
As much as you might disagree w/ someone or their policy, that doesn't make that person a liar. Oddly, that's the one thing Liberals can't seem to get through their skulls.
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Someone tells me that you killed my mom. My policy is not to question what I'm told, so I tell everyone that you did it, and I kill you.
Originally posted by AURaptor:
As much as you might disagree w/ someone or their policy, that doesn't make that person a liar. Oddly, that's the one thing Liberals can't seem to get through their skulls.
I'm so sorry if you disagree with my policy. At least I didn't lie.
isall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Another analogy:
Originally posted by Asiansolo:
I saw what the Iraqi people had to put up with and I am glad that we liberated them .
My dad was keeping us hostage in our house, beating us periodically. He'd let us go to work and buy food & such, but it wasn't a nice existence. The police came in and had a shootout with him, tearing up the block, and killing him. At least my brother & sisters & I are free of him, but our car was destroyed, as well as our home and the place where we all worked, plus our mom & some friends were also killed.
There had to be a better way.
BTW, I'm glad you came back alive & well, and I respect your service to this country, Asiansolo.
Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:Quote:Someone tells me that you killed my mom. My policy is not to question what I'm told, so I tell everyone that you did it, and I kill you.
Originally posted by AURaptor:
As much as you might disagree w/ someone or their policy, that doesn't make that person a liar. Oddly, that's the one thing Liberals can't seem to get through their skulls.
I'm so sorry if you disagree with my policy. At least I didn't lie.
If I'm the one w/ a history of killing moms, and I've told you yours is next, I'd say you have a case there. But since I'm not a mom killer, and happen to think quite highly of your mom ( she made you, didn't she ? ) then there's little chance such a rumor is valid.
You analogy does not fit the circumstances of the discussion at hand.
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:!@#@!!! You're taking it literally!!!! ANY analogy falls apart that way- it's the parallels that matter, doofus!
Originally posted by AURaptor:
If I'm the one w/ a history of killing moms, and I've told you yours is next, I'd say you have a case there. But since I'm not a mom killer, and happen to think quite highly of your mom ( she made you, didn't she ? ) then there's little chance such a rumor is valid.
Quote:Your rejection of my analogy does not fit the circumstances of the discussion at hand.
You analogy does not fit the circumstances of the discussion at hand.
Edit to add: But hey- what do I expect? You're evil....
Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Edit to add: But hey- what do I expect? You're evil....
Hey, I praised your mom. I can't be THAT evil, can I ?
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Like I've said before, I sense the good in you- the conflict....
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Hey, I praised your mom. I can't be THAT evil, can I ?
Jediisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
this thread is changing meisall.....
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
As Auraptor is the only one on the other side of this issue who really can debate this,this is directed to you. I am assuming you either condone torture or you don't. If you condone torture, then you are an evil person, plain and simple. In all our movies and television shows its the bad guys who torture and the good guys who overcome. Well guess what, Bush condones and promotes torture, making him evil. Hell our beloved Firefly has the evil guy doing torture and the good guys using violence only when they had to. The war aside you should not agree with this policy. We can go a step further, we have tortured people who are not guilty of any crime, I mean come on, the guy is not a good man. So to paraphrase you are either with the torturers or you are against them. Where do you stand?
When there are no heroes where will we turn?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by avengingwatcher:
As Auraptor is the only one on the other side of this issue who really can debate this,this is directed to you. I am assuming you either condone torture or you don't. If you condone torture, then you are an evil person, plain and simple. In all our movies and television shows its the bad guys who torture and the good guys who overcome. Well guess what, Bush condones and promotes torture, making him evil. Hell our beloved Firefly has the evil guy doing torture and the good guys using violence only when they had to. The war aside you should not agree with this policy. We can go a step further, we have tortured people who are not guilty of any crime, I mean come on, the guy is not a good man. So to paraphrase you are either with the torturers or you are against them. Where do you stand?
When there are no heroes where will we turn?
Sorry to go all Bill Clinton on ya, but that depends on how torture is defined. I don't believe Bush condones torture, at least not as I define it.
Electric shocks ? - Torture . No good
Chopping off of limbs, extremities? - Torture. No good
Bamboo shoots ? Torture, no good.
Caning ? Torture, no good.
Water-boarding ? - Fuzzy area. Only to be used in rare ,extreme situations
Sleep deprivation? - Not torture
Cold Floor beds? - Not torture
Over exposure to Celine Dion's greatest hits? - Borderline, but not unless it exceeds 24 straight hours.
Now, if a prisoner agrees to talk, and is still submitted to these things, regardless of their willingness to comply, then yes....the above WOULD be torture.
I guess that's where we differ. I don't automatically assume that we harshly interrogate folks for the pure hell of it, while many on this board do. Understand, we're not dealing w/ a group of Lamb Scouts here, but committed believers in their holy jihad to destroy all things not like them. That includes you, me and pretty much everyone we all know. Thems are folks I don't rightly mind getting a little rough with, as long as it's well with in limits.
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Aurpaptor you realize that people have died under our torture, right? Don't you think torturing someone to death is a bit harsh? The specific examale I am talking about is the one who was chained to the floor and left to starve to death. I wish water boarding was only used in extreme torture, and to be honest there are some interrogation techniques I understand them using, i.e where the woman supposedly wiped her vaginal blood on the Muslims face... odd but it worked and she got in trouble for it, burning the Koran I don't mind, psychological torture does not bother me as much as physical torture. You can live a healthy life after psych torture, but death is pretty final.
Edit: Just wanted to point out that not all the people we have tortured have been guilty of crimes. Some were released after we admitted they were not guilty of any crime. So our own government admits we have subjected completely guiltless people to these techniques.
Sleep, food deprivation can be fatal if not done right, the military does both so I can't say I would consider them harsh torture either, but chaining someone to a floor for days on end, beating them, water boarding are all forms of torture and they have been used on the innocents by us.
Just an fyi, they used water boarding during the Spanish Inquisition...they called it interrogation as well.
When there are no heroes where will we turn?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:This is where we completely part ways morally speaking- it IS torture & WE shouldn't do it to ANYONE, regardless of how 'bad' they might or might not be.
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Water-boarding ? - Fuzzy area. Only to be used in rare ,extreme situations
Torture is unreliable,
it brings us down to their level,
and it makes us evil.
We put mad dogs to sleep; we do not torture them.
Somewhere in your brain you have sustained collateral damage, AU. Let the good side win...
isall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:That's a big EWWWWUE....I would write her up for that! Make her take mandatory hygiene classes for a year.
Originally posted by avengingwatcher:
there are some interrogation techniques I understand them using, i.e where the woman supposedly wiped her vaginal blood on the Muslims face...
Not approving Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
http://www.reference.com/search?q=water%20boarding
references to water boarding... our own military has court martialed people for it.
When there are no heroes where will we turn?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
avenging - as I pointed out, only in rare circumstances, and only if those in charge are mindful of the condition of the 'inmate' . I know sub sandwiches can ( and have been shown ) go much, much further in getting the trust of a detainee than a cold floor. But it depends on who you're dealing with. In tough times, I want the ABILITY to use tough tactics, even if we don't ever use them or not.
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"immobilizing a person on their back with the head inclined downward (the Trendelenburg position), and pouring water over the face and into the breathing passages. Through forced suffocation and inhalation of water, the subject experiences the process of drowning and is made to believe that death is imminent. In contrast to merely submerging the head face-forward, waterboarding almost immediately elicits the gag reflex. Although waterboarding does not always cause lasting physical damage, it carries the risks of extreme pain, damage to the lungs, brain damage caused by oxygen deprivation, injuries (including broken bones) due to struggling against restraints, and even death. The psychological effects on victims of waterboarding can last for years after the procedure."
Now, that doesn't sound so bad, does it?
What's the fussisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:And if you break a mugger's leg during his attack on you, you can go to jail for it.
Originally posted by AURaptor:
In tough times, I want the ABILITY to use tough tactics, even if we don't ever use them or not.
Yeah, I trust the government to be able to judge these things fairly.
Sarcasmisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
It's funny how Iraq was training radical islamic terrorists, when as a secular government the radical islamic terrorists were gunning for iraq. It's kinda like if the US funded and trained Osama Bin Landen, oh, that actually happened didn't it. Ok, it's like if the US funded and trained the Taliban, ok, again, bad example...
There is a saying which I believe is Persian which the Islamic people use and it goes something like this, "My brother and I against my cousin and my cousin and I against the world." They also say, "The Friend of my enemy is my enemy..."
Quote:
But lets take the article head on:
"The secret training took place primarily at three camps--in Samarra, Ramadi, and Salman Pak"
Salman Pak, you conceed, was not used for such purpose, so I assume I don't need to prove it. So we have Samarra and Ramadi.
In the case of Samarra, I find nothing. I've not heard of it before, I admit, so I googled it. With the search "Samarra Terrorist Camp", I got nothing, the closest being news reports of the post invasion terrorist attacks on a mosque in the town of Samarra. So I see that as suspect at best.
Ramadi is much the same story. The only mention of Terrorist camps comes from the "Weekly Standard", which seems to have plucked the accusation from thin air.
So the main Terrorist training centres are "Salman Pak", which even the CIA knew wasn't, "Samarra" and "Ramadi" which seems to have no mention anywhere beyond the "Weekly Standards" seemingly unsupported editorial. The very fact that Samarra and Ramadi are mentioned in the same breath as Salman Pak bring them in to question, the fact that there seems to be no corroborating evidence seals the deal for me.
Finding these articles would be difficult if you desired to find them, and I somehow suspect that you wouldn't be too thrilled at finding the evidence. I would be thrilled at finding the information and yet even I can't be bothered to search too deeply so I can't tell you if these articles exist, but I can tell you from talking with Veterans of the Special Forces who were there that these camps did exist.
http://swyzzlestyx.com/index.html
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Putting a conditional on torture is immoral. That is like saying it is occasionally okay to break the commandments. It is only torture if we do it this way...lol the reason we train for it is to prepare our soldiers for it. The course? Counter-torture techniques. Just because someone breaks does not mean that they are being honest either, they could be lying to stop the torture.
When there are no heroes where will we turn?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:And I can tell you from talking with veterans of the Special Forces and people somewhat higher than that, that they did not.
Originally posted by rallem:
Finding these articles would be difficult if you desired to find them, and I somehow suspect that you wouldn't be too thrilled at finding the evidence. I would be thrilled at finding the information and yet even I can't be bothered to search too deeply so I can't tell you if these articles exist, but I can tell you from talking with Veterans of the Special Forces who were there that these camps did exist.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:Quote:And I can tell you from talking with veterans of the Special Forces and people somewhat higher than that, that they did not.
Originally posted by rallem:
Finding these articles would be difficult if you desired to find them, and I somehow suspect that you wouldn't be too thrilled at finding the evidence. I would be thrilled at finding the information and yet even I can't be bothered to search too deeply so I can't tell you if these articles exist, but I can tell you from talking with Veterans of the Special Forces who were there that these camps did exist.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
You have no idea what level the people I spoke to wee so you cannot say that.
http://swyzzlestyx.com/index.htmlNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I can't say that the some of the people I spoke to were higher than some of the other people I spoke to? Ok. I think you need to take a refresher course in reading comprehension
Originally posted by rallem:
You have no idea what level the people I spoke to wee so you cannot say that.
. Actually Special Forces personnel on the ground don't tend to be very high up the chain of command, not much past Sargent, which is lower than my own grade FYI.More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I don't disagree with you on that! It's just interesting to see that even the most positive and humorous people - like you - can get beat down by RWED, all the way to the point of calling folks evil. Hey - I'll admit I find it funny and oddly satisfying, but it won't get us anywhere but further divided.
Originally posted by chrisisall:
How can we have serious political discussions here anyway? It's always no-oh-oh, yes-ess-ess. Facts are irrelevant; it's opinions that dominate. Lies are mis-told truth, and truth is mis-understood lies.
[/serious mode]
I sometimes wonder what the RWED would be like if the serious name-callers and overly defensive types (I don't mean you) would just shut up for a while. I mean, do you ever get the feeling that people might actually agree on the basics, but they're so busy being Type A, mis-reading each other's posts and screaming and yelling over strawmen, that they can't see it? They turn everything into so much a bigger deal than it is.
YOU SAY THIS ONE WATERBOARDING CASE IS PERMISSABLE THEREFORE YOU LOVE ALL TORTURE AND HATE AMERICA YOU NAZI LOVING FREEEEEEEK!!!!!!!!!
YOU DON'T SUPPORT THIS OTHER WATERBOARDING CASE THEREFORE YOU'RE WITH THE TERRORISTS AND HATE AMERICA YOU NAZI LOVING FREEEEEEEK!!!!!!
*sigh*
Quote:No fun glue, sorry, just a theory I've been working on for many years...
You are not banned from this thread Mal, provided you supply me with glue to sniff to make my digestion of AU's position on world politics easier to understand.
See, it's a cult. Bush and his crew and his diehard following is totally a cult built around a central personality and a system of paranoia, blind loyalty, and self-deception. Focus the spotlight on that last one: self-deception. That's the key. I tell you, Scott McClellan - his own actions and the things he said about Bush - made this so clear to me. They're a cult, plain and simple.
I don't believe they're consciously, intentionally cultish, and I don't believe they're evil. All the accusations we throw at them - and at Rap - will never make any sense to them because they genuinely aren't out to hurt anyone. They just want to exist on their own terms, which include a few basic and not unreasonable things, such as: 1) A solid foundation on which to build a sense of self worth 2) The safety of being able to identify friend from foe 3) Power over their own fate, rather than helplessness.
I think we all have these needs, but a good cult will find ways to twist them, to make people act against their own interests, just so they can have a guarantee that these needs will be met. ie 1) America is the F*cking BEST and if anyone doesn't like us it's because they're JEALOUS! 2) As long as I surround myself with white-skinned well-dressed Bible-loving folks who wear US flag lapel pins, no one will ever, ever hurt me. 3) I'm unhappy and gotta act right now dammit! Something, anything! You say Muslims did it? All right, let's go kill some Muslims!
The problem lies in how people get so desperate to have these needs met, and so reliant on the cult that guarantees all this for them, that they can't see the damage being done. They can't face up to how maybe things aren't working so good. If they do, they lose everything. Everything! No wonder Rap puts up such a fight. Losing Bush is more than losing a hero to him - it's the loss of his identity as a vastly superior and righteous American, the loss of his personal security blanket and his percieved control over a scary and dangerous world. In fact, I'd say that attacking him the way folks do in RWED will only make him cling more tightly to his cult. It fits his idea that liberals and Democrats are out to get him and destroy the comfy fortress that Bush built. He may really believe that has no where else to go.
BTW, lest this be taken as Dem/Rep thing - I became a strident Hillary non-supporter because I began to see some very Bush-like tendencies in her, self-deception being the main thing. What did McClellan say? Bush makes himself believe things that are
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Special Forces personal on the Ground in an A Team are very rarely below the rank of Sergeant and there usually is an officer there or very nearby, and there are warrent officers too.
http://swyzzlestyx.com/index.html
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:No, I'm not so beat down, but I am tired of actually arguing my points to the point of frustration. Peeps will believe what they will- best have a sense of humour about it.
Originally posted by mal4prez:
even the most positive and humorous people - like you - can get beat down by RWED, all the way to the point of calling folks evil.
Quote:Y'know, when we ain't talkin' politics, I actually get on well with the dude. Peeps need to ease up on the control thing...me included at times.
They can't face up to how maybe things aren't working so good. If they do, they lose everything. Everything! No wonder Rap puts up such a fight. Losing Bush is more than losing a hero to him - it's the loss of his identity as a vastly superior and righteous American, the loss of his personal security blanket and his percieved control over a scary and dangerous world. In fact, I'd say that attacking him the way folks do in RWED will only make him cling more tightly to his cult.
Quote:Scarier to hear that crap than bona fide lies, IMO.
She wasn't just trying to fool us - she wasn't lying. She really talked herself into believing these things she said
Maybe Bush didn't lie, but the alternative is worse, so I was giving him the benefit of the doubt, heh heh.
BTW Mal, you are evil.
Evil Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Do you bother to read what I write? I didn't say below Sergeant, I said not much past (higher than) it. A Warrant Officer in the US army, which is what I assume you are referring to, is between NCOs and Commissioned officers in Rank, i.e. not very high up the chain of command. As for officers I'd be surprised to see anyone above an O3 routinely in the field, but more likely an O1 or O2.
Originally posted by rallem:
Special Forces personal on the Ground in an A Team are very rarely below the rank of Sergeant and there usually is an officer there or very nearby, and there are warrent officers too.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Mal4Prez:
Once again, I bow to you. You are my idol.
Well said, and too true. Even the part about "certain people" getting a bit too aggro about their points. Point taken. :)
Never thought about it that way, but it makes perfect sense. Cult Bush. Cripes, it sounds even worse than Cult Saturn!
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Agreed! Um... except when I have a chance to wax on about my odd theories...
Originally posted by chrisisall:
No, I'm not so beat down, but I am tired of actually arguing my points to the point of frustration. Peeps will believe what they will- best have a sense of humour about it.
Yeah, and the debates have gotten old. Lying! Not lying! Was too! Was not! Your candidate's a toad! Your mom's ugly! You're a nazi! You're a biped!
Ok, I admit - I do enjoy that last one LOL!
Quote:There was point when I realized that W wasn't actually the head of an evil but competent cabal with plans of exploiting Iraq for oil and taking over the world. Thing is, if that were the case, he'd at least have a plan. Meaning, yes, I find it scarier that the leader of the free world got the US mired in this mess through nothing but his own idiocy and psychological backwardness. There's just no clear no way out.
Scarier to hear that crap than bona fide lies, IMO.
Quote:Why thank you. I do my best.
BTW Mal, you are evil.
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You're welcome.
Originally posted by mal4prez:
Why thank you. I do my best.
Absolutely off-topic: Burn Notice tomorrow on DVD...be there. Aloha.
Charred Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:Quote:Do you bother to read what I write? I didn't say below Sergeant, I said not much past (higher than) it. A Warrant Officer in the US army, which is what I assume you are referring to, is between NCOs and Commissioned officers in Rank, i.e. not very high up the chain of command. As for officers I'd be surprised to see anyone above an O3 routinely in the field, but more likely an O1 or O2.
Originally posted by rallem:
Special Forces personal on the Ground in an A Team are very rarely below the rank of Sergeant and there usually is an officer there or very nearby, and there are warrent officers too.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
You are mistaken with the Warrent Officers in the Army. Now a Warrent Officer is considered a commisioned officer and while the pay is different it is considered a wo1 is equal to a 2lt, a cw2 to a 1lt, cw3, a cpt, cw4 a maj, and a cw5 to a ltc. When I was in the Army they only went up to cw4, but I think they are considering raising it to cw6.
http://swyzzlestyx.com/index.htmlNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Actually it's not that simple, because Warrant Officers are technical, not command. That's why they're on a different pay grade. A CW2 on is considered a commissioned rank, but I've not seen anything that suggests they're equivalent to the generalist command Commissioned Officer ranks.
Originally posted by rallem:
You are mistaken with the Warrent Officers in the Army. Now a Warrent Officer is considered a commisioned officer and while the pay is different it is considered a wo1 is equal to a 2lt, a cw2 to a 1lt, cw3, a cpt, cw4 a maj, and a cw5 to a ltc. When I was in the Army they only went up to cw4, but I think they are considering raising it to cw6.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:Quote:Actually it's not that simple, because Warrant Officers are technical, not command. That's why they're on a different pay grade. A CW2 on is considered a commissioned rank, but I've not seen anything that suggests they're equivalent to the generalist command Commissioned Officer ranks.
Originally posted by rallem:
You are mistaken with the Warrent Officers in the Army. Now a Warrent Officer is considered a commisioned officer and while the pay is different it is considered a wo1 is equal to a 2lt, a cw2 to a 1lt, cw3, a cpt, cw4 a maj, and a cw5 to a ltc. When I was in the Army they only went up to cw4, but I think they are considering raising it to cw6.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
You are right it is more complicated than that and from the explanation I received verbally that was basically it. I don’t know if the example I provided is in any way official or not, and I don’t know if it was made to help soldiers understand the rank of the warrant officer. When I was in the Army an enlisted man did not have to salute a warrant officer but at the same time it was not a sin to salute a warrant officer and my limited exposure was to warrant officers who were helicopter pilots.
http://swyzzlestyx.com/index.htmlNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The "ability" is always there, Rapo. What you want is the legality.
I want the ABILITY to use tough tactics, even if we don't ever use them or not.
Mal4Prez- Agreed on the cult thing. What I see... take it FWIW... is that those who stick closest to Bush are run by fear. (I also noticed that they tend to pick the most self-aggrandizing names, like 'gold raptor' and 'hero' and 'Finn McCumhal'... but I digress.) I feel sorry for Rapo. He's driven by fear, which can apparently only be assuaged by burying himself into the middle of the biggest, toughest herd he can find. And now, he's thinking that his herd may be dissolving from around him. No wonder he's so paranoid. He sees every question as a defection from the group that's between him and the other.
But to get to the question of Bush's position in the cult. Curiously, he's not the real leader.
If I had to pick anyone it would be Cheney. It was Cheney who anointed himself VP (Recall that he was the head of the VP search committee. When he picked himself as the most credible candidate.. bum ticker and all.. I can't help thinking of the cartoon "Aladdin" where the Grand Vizier in fake surprise says... 'Why, that would be... me!!!'), he was the one who headed the secretive Energy Task Force that looked longingly on a map of Iraq, appointed Rumsfeld who in turn appointed Wolfowitz, Cheney who held Bush's hand during the 9-11 Commission hearings, set up the Office of Special Plans (OSP) to bypass intelligence vetting of Iraq data, and who haunted the analysts' offices while the intel was being collated.
But what about Bush?
I actually got a lot out of Scott McClellan's book. It seems the straw the broke that camels' back for Scott was the outing of Valerie Plame, and the fact that "they" subsequently lied to him... used him...to say that nobody in the WH was aware or authorized the leak when they clearly had. At some point, when he realized he'd been duped his effectiveness as Press Scy tanked.
But his take on Bush as a self-deceiver is key. Bush has a conveniently flexible inner narrative. Bush believes what Cheney tells him, and because Bush HAS to believe that he's "the decider" he also believes that he thought it up all on his own. And if the story changes, so does his inner narrative. Bush has no ethical anchor or mental compass, no sense of where he's been and what direction he's heading.
Bush may have consciously lied from time to time, but mostly he believes the latest version of what he's been told. For him it's a seamless slide from al Qaida to WMD to "mission accomplished" to "freedom" to "the surge is working". Right now Cheney et al have no reason to plant yet another narrative in Bush's mind: Altho the Iraq war didn't wind up with showers of rose petals, the oil companies are making money hand over fist and so is Halliburton. So why rock the boat? Status quo is fine for them.
---------------------------------
My mind's made up. Don't confuse me with the facts.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I sometimes wonder what's been done to Bush. He started out with some brains and abilities, even if a sociopath. Now he's some weird, putty-colored non-human puppet thing.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think he's been chemically altered. Some of it his own doing no doubt. I saw clips of him "back in the day" when he was helping his daddy's campaign. He actually had a spark of spontaneity, wit and charm. Now he's like a shell... he doesn't know what to do or what to say unless someone is telling him, like that debate picture of "the box" under his jacket, and those infamous voices to whom he spontaneously whined "Let me finish!! in the middle of his own statement when no one was interrupting.
Some people claim that his jaw shake is typical of present cocaine use. Others say he's a dry drunk. I think he's manipulated heavily. Maybe they "let" him have coke if he's a good boy. Feed him pills to sleep, and more pills to wake up. Even being the figurehead of so much damage, I kinda feel sorry for him. He's in way over his head and after his term is over they'll just kick him to the curb. But right now he's pretty much invisible... just running out the clock while oil and private security companies rake it in.
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Paul O'Neill (The Price of Loyalty) described how, early-on in the administration, he would meet with Bush to discuss the economy, and Bush would stare ahead, not responding in any way. To the point of not even having a non-verbal reaction to his presence. O'Neill was an experienced CEO, playing chicken in the boardrooms of multi-nationals. I'm sure he saw every variation of high-stakes deception and game-playing imaginable. And if he says Bush was weird - far outside of behavior he'd experienced - then Bush was weird.
When it comes to Bush, I don't care how much you remind someone to 'behave' and not make any comments, ask any questions, provide any feedback, cause any problems. A person with even semi-normal neurology is going to show some trace of human reaction, if only to flick a glance at the person who is talking and moving. Bush's behavior was clearly pathological.
I can't help but think there is something creepier than delusion and a smoldering drug habit going on. And how much did baby Bush agree to and how much was done to.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
What could be worse? A secret surgical frontal lobotomy? A chemical lobotomy?
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I have no clue.
But think about Bush's 'deer-in-the-headlights' minutes afer 9/11. It has some congruence with what O'Neill described.
What could possibly cause both reactions ?
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I dunno... electroshock "treatment"? Too much L-dopa? Aversive conditioning? Hypnosis? Cocaine rewards for good behavior?
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
I feel sorry for Rapo. He's driven by fear, which can apparently only be assuaged by burying himself into the middle of the biggest, toughest herd he can find. And now, he's thinking that his herd may be dissolving from around him. No wonder he's so paranoid. He sees every question as a defection from the group that's between him and the other.j
I love how some of you pocket psychologist have it all figured out, or so you think. Herd or no, dealing head on w/ the problems facing our country is the best solution. There's no paranoia here, just understanding. SOME want to deny it, placate those who vow to murder us , at any expense, and simply go on living their day, as if it were like any other. I'm just glad my country has leaders who are willing to do the right thing.
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
I feel sorry for Rapo. He's driven by fear, which can apparently only be assuaged by burying himself into the middle of the biggest, toughest herd he can find. And now, he's thinking that his herd may be dissolving from around him. No wonder he's so paranoid. He sees every question as a defection from the group that's between him and the other.j
I love how some of you pocket psychologist have it all figured out, or so you think. Herd or no, dealing head on w/ the problems facing our country is the best solution. There's no paranoia here, just understanding. SOME want to deny it, placate those who vow to murder us , at any expense, and simply go on living their day, as if it were like any other. I'm just glad my country has leaders who are willing to do the right thing.
Prove it.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Rapo, there is a big disconnect in your brain that just can't be crossed by the spark of discovery. So here's the secret that's been in plain view all along: I agree with you! We ALL agree with you!
I love how some of you pocket psychologist have it all figured out, or so you think. Herd or no, dealing head on w/ the problems facing our country is the best solution.There's no paranoia here, just understanding.
Figure THAT one out!
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Coming in late:
Totally agree with the initial post.
And though I havn't read the whole thing yet, I feel safe in assuming anything Rap has to say is utter bullshit (I can already hear his "Bush didn't lie - ever!" refrain....).
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Careful - my head is big enough already LOL!
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Mal4Prez:
Once again, I bow to you. You are my idol.
Quote:Actually, wasn't meaning to poke at you. In fact, I frequently find that when I'm tempted to come out of lurkerdom I don't need to, cause you post the argument I'd use - by which I mean information based rather than emotional.
Well said, and too true. Even the part about "certain people" getting a bit too aggro about their points. Point taken. :)
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ehhh...how about this. Grow up, people. I don't agree with all of what Bush has done, however....
If a Democrat had been in the office when 9/11 happened, they would have limpwristed their way through it. 9/11 was an act of war. Not a police action...
Rememebr when the Twin Towers were first attacked? And Clintons response to it?
Do I agree with losing our privacy and freedoms for this? Hell the f no. But do I think a weak Democrat is the right idea? Noooooo......
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Just for shits and grins, I'll say a piece for the 'other' side.
A while ago, I caught an episode of Boston Legal (purely on accident, believe me) that caused me to consider things somewhat differently.
In the episode, the Alan Shore character had agreed to take on a case for a group who wanted to secede from the US - some county in Connecticut or something - mainly due to disagreements with the policies of the Bush administration. His partner, and good friend, Denny Crane was appalled that Shore would agree to represent such an unpatriotic cause. To cut to the chase, Crane volunteered to represent the defense and ended up arguing against his old friend in court.
The debate was interesting, if largely predictable, but Crane made a particular point that opened my eyes a bit. He made the case that people of younger generations, particularly post-World War II, lack a certain appreciation for the fragility of national independence and sovereignty. He pointed out that most of us can't even really conceive of the possibility that we may lose the nation that we take for granted.
He argued that people of his generation, and perhaps others with a clear understanding what's a stake, can imagine the possibility of waking up one day to find that our nation is lost, discovering that, in our complacency, we've failed to protect that which is most dear - and lost it. Many of them faced that very possibility when it looked like nothing could withstand the relentless march of Hitler across Europe and they know it can happen again.
Overall, I think the argument is an overstatement, especially when you consider the relative strength of the Islamic fundamentalists. They're mostly a boogeyman, an slim excuse for PNAC's global agenda. But I do feel like I have a little better understanding of where the hawks are coming from - and why it can become such an emotional issue for them.
The irony is that, in my opinion, their emotional response veres into the irrational, and they begin doing exactly the things that might bring about the thing they fear most.
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:And insecurity. Yes, I think those are the two main motivations behind getting caught up in these cult groups.
Originally posted by SignyM:
Mal4Prez- Agreed on the cult thing. What I see... take it FWIW... is that those who stick closest to Bush are run by fear.
Quote:Nope. Just a figurehead - and what a good one. He's so daft he's perfect - questions bounce off him like he's a moldy lump of swiss cheese, and he's so easy deluded that he believes every insane thing he says, hence folks like Rap can defend the administrations actions. The President believes and defends it, so it MUST be true!
But to get to the question of Bush's position in the cult. Curiously, he's not the real leader.
Quote:Wow. I hd totally forgotten that line - it's perfect LOL! Cheney truly is the devil in this situation. If there's anyone I can be convinced is evil, it's him. He viewed Watergate as a wrongful drain of executive power, and it's been his goal since then to change the balance back. Well, he achieved his aim.
I can't help thinking of the cartoon "Aladdin" where the Grand Vizier in fake surprise says... 'Why, that would be... me!!!')
As for Bush - I too have seen comparisons of him as President to him in the early 90s. It's frightening. Definitely mental decay. I have no idea what did it. I'm so amused by the idea of Cheney throwing him a little bag of coke and sending him off to a playroom while the adults do business LOL!
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Ehhh...how about this. Grow up, people. I don't agree with all of what Bush has done, however....
If a Democrat had been in the office when 9/11 happened, they would have limpwristed their way through it. 9/11 was an act of war. Not a police action...
Those psychic powers of yours must be mighty handy, being able to tell what would have happened if an alternate reality.
And yeah, 9/11 was an act of war. Too bad we didn't actually commit to winning that war, and instead started another one with someone un-related....
But I guess some people will just feel better as long as we blow someone up.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
9/11 was an act of war.
But this is the single biggest mistake we've made. It wasn't an act of war. It was a politically inspired criminal act. It was a terrorist attack, not warfare. They're not the same thing. That's why we have different words for them.
For some reason though, our leadership wanted a war. So they opportunistically used the emotional state of our nation, and the ambiguities of our language to create one. But it's war against no one, with no victory conditions. It's Orwell's perpetual war and it's no coincidence our leaders have followed his blueprint for sustaining it. "Doublespeak" is alive and well, and a key tool for the Bush administration.
I don't think we'll make any real progress in stopping the terrorist threat until we understand the difference between warfare and terrorism. Applying strategies of war to a problem that isn't a war will never work.
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Rememebr when the Twin Towers were first attacked? And Clintons response to it?"
Ehhh, he caught, prosecuted and jailed the people responsible. Put al Qaeda on HIS personal map - had a cabinet level terrorist watch group which actually tried to warn Bush about 9/11 (before Bush dismantled it and then outed a covert CIA operative). Kept the US safe for the balance of his terms.
AND balanced the budget, put the US on good terms with allies and new friends, and had a great US economy to boot. Remember those heady days when people were actually wondering how to spend the surplus ?
You have a problem with that ?
***************************************************************
Bush OTOH let bin Laden go, let al Qaeda regroup, blinded himself on the real mid-east threat (Iran) by outing the one person who had a chance of getting nuclear information (Plame), attacked a bystander nation ... busted the budget and alienated pretty much everyone, which wrecked the economy and sank the dollar.
And you don't have a problem with that ?
Because why ? Because Bush stuffed a codpiece in the front of his flightsuit, waddled like a baby with an overfull diaper, and declared Iraq done ?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
But it's war against no one, with no victory conditions. It's Orwell's perpetual war and it's no coincidence our leaders have followed his blueprint for sustaining it.
This is what I've been saying since before the war, when Bush claimed his "Global War on Terror" - it's a war on *ideas*, a war on *thoughts*. After all, what exactly constitutes "terror"? Anything and everything that is aimed at terrorizing people or terrifying them? Are horror movies then considered "terror"? What about news reports? What about Republican ad campaigns? Are those terror?
You've launched a war against a tenuous, invisible enemy who's ever-changing, and you can never, ever win it, but you've got what you wanted: the Long War.
EC
Takin' Care of Business, Baby!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
If a Democrat had been in the office when 9/11 happened, they would have limpwristed their way through it. 9/11 was an act of war. Not a police action...
You mean that if McCain had been in office, he'd have surrendered and denounced America? He's done it before!
Just wondering.
Takin' Care of Business, Baby!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So Rapo, have you figured out yet how we can agree on your essential point, which is tackling the problem of jihadism head-on?
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
If don't support Bush you don't believe in defending yourself and the innocent in your own country and supporting bombing murders, believing that evil people are really misunderstood souls and hiding behind rhetoric I think your entitled to your opinion.
How is your evil meter?I wonder if your your evil meter is working. Some people have a good evil meter and some people's evil meter's just don't work very well. My mother's evil meter is pathetic( although she herself is pretty great) so she borrows my excellent evil meter when she dates a man. She asks me whether I like him and I usually tell her I don't and then she doesn't go out with him anymore.
I've known evil people unfortunately. Those evil persons are a long story and I won't discuss it now. As a result of knowing evil people I have developed an uncanny sense of people who are good indifferent or evil and good people just from passing them. I got a really bad feeling when I once passed a bloke on a bus and just from that awful vibe, I deliberately sat a long way away from him. When I stepped off the bus I mentioned him to the person who was picking me up and she told me he was convicted of raping an old lady 5 years ago.
Completely unrelated, do you think that there would have been a more positive public response to the Iraq war if Arnold Swarteneggar had been the president instead of George Bush during the time of the Iraq war? I think Arnold would have said 2 words beacause in the terminator he often said 2 words and he would have been believed.
To the person who said Clinton was handsome I would like to respond by saying that Clinton is not handsome at all!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Was this supposed to read "If YOU don't support Bush you don't believe in defending yourself and the innocent in your own country and supporting bombing murders, believing that evil people are really misunderstood souls and hiding behind rhetoric I think your entitled to your opinion."
May I ask you a question or two ? How did bombing and killing tens to hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis fight 'evil' ? And, uhhmm, since you claim such a great evil-meter - why didn't this obviously wanton destruction of human life that made 9/11 pale in scope - make yours peg-out ?
***************************************************************
My evil-meter is pretty good - I deduced Bush was a sociopath from during his first campaign.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
If it had been a terrorist who killed a large number of Iraqis (And actually quite a large portion were killed by terrorsts)my evil meter would definantly start humming.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So you don't define people as evil by what they do. You define them as evil according to who you think they are. They are evil b/c I think they're terrorists and terrorists are evil.
Nice circular logic. And by that I mean idiotic.
***************************************************************
"By their fruits you shall know them."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Can I ask you a question? Do you think terrorists are evil or just acting in defense? Because I don't think bombing people to make others conform to a religious belief is defending islam or a country. I think it as offensive as an attack. There is no goodness in that at all. But if a terrorist was acting in defence when people were killing his family then this would be good. The difference between defence and offence is when you hope to repel the ememy by the size of your peace time army or by taking action that you hope will reduce the offensive actions of the other party on your country. If you don't think the action will help stop someone from killing you then it is more like revenge.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think bombing a country that wasn't hurting you and wasn't going to hurt you is evil. Agreed ?
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh come on. It's a simple question.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
But if a terrorist was acting in defence when people were killing his family then this would be good.
Isn't that part of the current situation in Iraq?
When you leave me nothing to live for, all you leave me is something to die for. What's left to me is to choose how, when, and where.
THAT is the situation we have put ourselves in in Iraq.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Completely unrelated, do you think that there would have been a more positive public response to the Iraq war if Arnold Swarteneggar had been the president instead of George Bush during the time of the Iraq war? I think Arnold would have said 2 words beacause in the terminator he often said 2 words and he would have been believed.
Completely irrelevant. Schwarzeneggar CAN NOT be the President of the United States, without a Constitutional Amendment. See Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 5, which reads in its entirety:
Quote:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
It's the first seven words that render Ahnolt's candidacy a non-issue. Might as well ask "What would have happened if Jesus Christ had been President on 9/11? Would he have miracled our asses out of a real bummer of a situation?"
Also, in the real world, you often encounter people who just steadfastly refuse to follow your script, so two words might not have been enough, or believed, unless those two words were "Oh, SHIT!"
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hey what stopped ya from being a human shield. Most dudes I know who work for Haliburton are democrats. I contract so I get around. The goverment can't handle dudes like me. Syria we need to blast off the face of the earth, then Ole Persia, stay in Iraq so europa gets their oil. The US gets it from Kuwait, SA, and Oman. Look scumming ole england after ww1. The bad US had to go over and bail em out. Were still there because we don't trust those idiots to have a military. Your propaganda don't work on me. Just like little villages in Vietnam stock piling rice huts for the enemy. Their just peaceful people scratching out a living. Rome was still the best place to live.
"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
If you don't think the action will help stop someone from killing you then it is more like revenge.
You're getting warmer...
I think you're falling into the Administration's talking-points trap, wherein you think Iraq was somehow linked to Osama Bin Laden and September Eleven. Going into Afghanistan, "revenge" or not, was completely justified in my view. Bin Laden was there, the Taliban gave him safe harbor and thought they were immune to any retribution, and showing them quite forcefully the error of their ways was a justifiable response.
I have no love for Bin Laden or for any terrorist. Find Osama, put him on trial, convict him, sentence him to death, and I will personally volunteer to put 30 bullets in that giant misshapen head of his (and this is coming from a far-left liberal!).
But we took our eye off the prize, and decided to wage war on Iraq instead, and instead of dealing a blow to terrorism and jihadis around the world, we gave them something worth fighting for - and they are, in droves. And because of our actions in Iraq, we are now seen as the invaders, the occupiers, the oppressors, and we've created more terrorists than we ever thought we could. Some of them are no doubt doing it because they truly believe in their mission (much like some of our forces), some because they just want to be in the action and hopefully be seen as a "hero" when it's all said and done (much like some of our forces), and some of them are doubtless there just to try to blow some shit up (much like some of our forces). There ARE evil people there, on both sides. What we call a "terrorist" in this war would have been called a "guerilla" in another time, or even a "minuteman" 240 years ago (remember, they didn't play by the rules, either, positioning snipers to take out high-ranking officers, in direct contravention of the accepted rules of warfare at the time). What WE saw as patriotism and crafty fighting during the Revolutionary War, the British saw as terrorism and unacceptable behavior by a band of insurgents.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by PirateCat:
Hey what stopped ya from being a human shield. Most dudes I know who work for Haliburton are democrats. I contract so I get around. The goverment can't handle dudes like me. Syria we need to blast off the face of the earth, then Ole Persia, stay in Iraq so europa gets their oil. The US gets it from Kuwait, SA, and Oman. Look scumming ole england after ww1. The bad US had to go over and bail em out. Were still there because we don't trust those idiots to have a military. Your propaganda don't work on me. Just like little villages in Vietnam stock piling rice huts for the enemy. Their just peaceful people scratching out a living. Rome was still the best place to live.
Now that, my freinds, was some genuine Frontier American gibberish.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
This rag head is running around in Jolly Ole England after being freed on bail. Thanks President George W. Bush. Glad America has Gitmo to hold, torture, and poke at the animals of humanity.
"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by PirateCat:
This rag head is running around in Jolly Ole England after being freed on bail. Thanks President George W. Bush. Glad America has Gitmo to hold, torture, and poke at the animals of humanity.
"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".
Wow - you're thanking Bush for freeing him?
As for Gitmo, don't hold your breath on that one. Seems the Supremes had a li'l somethin' to say on the subject...
But I totally understand your need to torture people to get your jollies; it's a pretty common thing amongst sociopaths. I don't AGREE with it, but I understand that you need it to feel like a real man.
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm still trying to figure out how PirateCat is related to PirateNews. hmmm....
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by mazaen:
Can I ask you a question? Do you think terrorists are evil or just acting in defense? Because I don't think bombing people to make others conform to a religious belief is defending islam or a country. I think it as offensive as an attack. There is no goodness in that at all. But if a terrorist was acting in defence when people were killing his family then this would be good. The difference between defence and offence is when you hope to repel the ememy by the size of your peace time army or by taking action that you hope will reduce the offensive actions of the other party on your country. If you don't think the action will help stop someone from killing you then it is more like revenge.
So, how does this apply to Iraq? They didn't attack us, so there goes that. And those who have killed Americans have been striking out against those who invaded their country, so there's your self-defense.
Your points do not match up.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME