When do we

[soxwon]

When is it time to bomb IRAN?
After what they did capturing British naval crew.
They have admitted they want Israel GONE.
When do we strike?
And will a democrat president go in and bomb, or simply try to NEGOTIATE?

[StockdaleforVeep]

all of the arab states want Israel destroyed and teach children that jews are the mating of an ape and a pig.

[getonbckthr]

A democrat in this day and age does not have the sack to invade anyone.

[1951Campbell]

A democrat in this day and age does not have the sack to invade anyone.

Ironically, nor do they have the sac to pull out of a foolish war.

[CaptainBallz]

When is it time to bomb IRAN?
After what they did capturing British naval crew.
They have admitted they want Israel GONE.
When do we strike?
And will a democrat president go in and bomb, or simply try to NEGOTIATE?

Go take a cold shower...

[TeeDeeGee]

all of the arab states want Israel destroyed and teach children that jews are the mating of an ape and a pig.
http://popwatch.ew.com/photos/uncategorized/175452__borat_l.jpg
Niiiiice

[getonbckthr]

Ironically, nor do they have the sac to pull out of a foolish war.
Whether you agree with the war or not you can not pull out until the job is done. If you do everything we have fought for the past 4 years and the lives that were lost would be useless. How would you like to tell a parent of a killed soldier you son was killed for nothing? Pulling out now would just allow a similar regime to Saddam take over all over again.

[1951Campbell]

Whether you agree with the war or not you can not pull out until the job is done. If you do everything we have fought for the past 4 years and the lives that were lost would be useless. How would you like to tell a parent of a killed soldier you son was killed for nothing? Pulling out now would just allow a similar regime to Saddam take over all over again.

How do you tell a parent of a dead soldier their son or daughter was the last person to die for a mistake?

This "can't pull out now" argument shows that once again many people don't understand the "sunk cost fallacy":

http://skepdic.com/sunkcost.html

[StockdaleforVeep]

How do you tell a parent of a dead soldier their son or daughter was the last person to die for a mistake?

This "can't pull out now" argument shows that once again many people don't understand the "sunk cost fallacy":

http://skepdic.com/sunkcost.html

by telling them the lives lost helped iraqi men and especially women become more free

One would also tell the parents that their son\dau volunteered and served\died bravely

[BURGH]

by telling them the lives lost helped iraqi men and especially women become more free

One would also tell the parents that their son\dau volunteered and served\died bravely

Unlike those drafted pussies we pushed out there in Vietnam.

:jagoff:

[StockdaleforVeep]

Unlike those drafted pussies we pushed out there in Vietnam.

:jagoff:

Didnt bring up vietnam because that was a draft and a different issue. I would say though i would be one of the few applauding them, not spitting on them

[CaptainBallz]

by telling them the lives lost helped iraqi men and especially women become more free

One would also tell the parents that their son\dau volunteered and served\died bravely

Just tell them that they were fighting so that one day lollipops would come spewing forth from Allahs asshole and suicide bombers would explode into showers of the buttery popcorn of freedom as the children dance and sing, finally realizing why it was oh-so- necessary for the Americans to kill the bulk of their family and imprison and torture the rest. In Bush they will praise and in COMPASSIONATE conservative freedom lovers who unselfishly gave pause to their own valiant crusade to end civil services for US citizens so that they could "liberate" the Middle East from the throes of "Arab-ness", one bomb and one depleted uranium-tipped bullet at a time....

That's what we'll tell them and all shall be right once more...

[fquaye14ten]

by telling them the lives lost helped iraqi men and especially women become more free



i'm sure they'll thank you and suck your dick shortly thereafter for allowing them to understand that their son/daughter died so towelheads could become more "free"

probably won't be the best beejer you ever had---those sorrow tears get in your peehole and sting something fierce. Trust me I know about the sorrow knobjob

[Myrtle]

What the fuck is "free" anyway? More Americanized? :jagoff:

[CaptainBallz]

What the fuck is "free" anyway? More Americanized? :jagoff:

This:
http://www.wilayahnetwork.com/news/newsletter/04062006/feature.jpg

http://www.tedmills.com/images/iraqtorturedogs.jpg

http://www.satyamag.com/sat.site.images/dreams.jpg

http://jennifer-eccleston.com/jennifer_eccleston/pictures/jennifer_eccleston_miss_shock_and_awe.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/akitzmil/iblog/C119883728/E502103713/Media/gitmo.jpg

http://www.truthout.org/imgs.art_01/3.probush.082705.grab.jpg

[1951Campbell]

Are you guys done humping your Noam Chomsky blow-up dolls yet? :jagoff:

[CaptainBallz]

Are you guys done humping your Noam Chomsky blow-up dolls yet? :jagoff:

:rolleyes:

So which side of your ass are going to talk out of today??

[1951Campbell]

:rolleyes:

So which side of your ass are going to talk out of today??

Being against the War in Iraq as I am does not make it necessary to reflexively reduce any dialog about the war to "OMG amerikkka is teh capitalist-imperialist evil, always, 4ever and no matter whut."

I thought you leftward folks appreciated nuance...

[CaptainBallz]

Being against the War in Iraq as I am does not make it necessary to reflexively reduce any dialog about the war to "OMG amerikkka is teh capitalist-imperialist evil, always, 4ever and no matter whut."

I thought you leftward folks appreciated nuance...

And at what point was that even uttered in the thread?
Myrtle brings up a point about what SFV-brand "freedom" actually is and I post some pictures about what it's actually meant thus far...
Then you post your tired little jab about the left wing that, once again, is sweeping, off the mark, and adds absolutely nothing to the conversation...

Plus, even if the efil-esque little rant that you think the thread was reduced to had been uttered, it does not negate certain facts about the capitalist drive and it's imperialistic results. I know you feel it more convenient to mock such notions instead of refute them, but you're a libertarian-- a little head burying is expected...;)

[1951Campbell]

And at what point was that even uttered in the thread?
Myrtle brings up a point about what SFV-brand "freedom" actually is and I post some pictures about what it's actually meant thus far...


...and the implicit message was not missed by me, your back-pedalling notwithstanding.

As for head-burying...c'mon, you can do better than a thinly-veiled charge of false consciousness. ;)

[fquaye14ten]

this is the boringest shit. why don't you guys be a little more predictable in your shit.

[CaptainBallz]

...and the implicit message was not missed by me, your back-pedalling notwithstanding.

As for head-burying...c'mon, you can do better than a thinly-veiled charge of false consciousness. ;)

uhhh, where's the back-pedalling?? Your charge was that I was implying this: "OMG amerikkka is teh capitalist-imperialist evil, always, 4ever and no matter whut."

Not sure where I was implying that this country will always be as foolish, wreckless, and irresponsible as it's been over the last 6 years or so-- Probably because I never said that...nor do I believe it. Sorry Campbell, you missed the point on that one.

And I don't think my charge of false consciousness was thinly-veiled at all... Maybe the smiley made it seem so. :D <--- Like that.

[CaptainBallz]

this is the boringest shit. why don't you guys be a little more predictable in your shit.

http://ganjataz.com/general-bollocks/images/by-GT/forum-shitz/pot-kettle-black.jpg

[1951Campbell]

uhhh, where's the back-pedalling?? Your charge was that I was implying this: "OMG amerikkka is teh capitalist-imperialist evil, always, 4ever and no matter whut."

Not sure where I was implying that this country will always be as foolish, wreckless, and irresponsible as it's been over the last 6 years or so-- Probably because I never said that...nor do I believe it. Sorry Campbell, you missed the point on that one.

And I don't think my charge of false consciousness was thinly-veiled at all... Maybe the smiley made it seem so. :D <--- Like that.

Well, if you say you don't believe it, there's not a lot I can argue, now, is there?

Although an unironic accusation of false consciousness makes me chuckle, though. :D

[fquaye14ten]

http://ganjataz.com/general-bollocks/images/by-GT/forum-shitz/pot-kettle-black.jpg

why did you have to bring race into this

[1951Campbell]

this is the boringest shit. why don't you guys be a little more predictable in your shit.

What are you doing here anyway? I thought all this shit was, like, arbitrary, man, and that legislators are the only ones with enough info to even have an opinion on such weighty matters...



;)

[fquaye14ten]

i knew you were going to say that

[1951Campbell]

i knew you were going to say that

:rolling:

[CaptainBallz]

Well, if you say you don't believe it, there's not a lot I can argue, now, is there?

Although an unironic accusation of false consciousness makes me chuckle, though. :D

I feel like I'm on acid... What's going on here??

Who are you, man!? :omg:

Just so I can figure this out here... Are you implying that I DO think that this country is eternally fucked by it's own capitalist-imperialistic girth and can never achieve any semblance sanity as an actor on the world stage?

If so, you've taken assumption into the stratosphere...
Ground Control to Major Tom(1951) -- Your Circuits Dead-- There's something wrong...

[1951Campbell]

You said:

Not sure where I was implying that this country will always be as foolish, wreckless, and irresponsible as it's been over the last 6 years or so-- Probably because I never said that...nor do I believe it.

and I'm taking you at your word.

I'm also making fun of you if you actually think that (1) false consciousness exists, and that (2) you can actually score debate points with it.

There.

[CaptainBallz]

You said:



and I'm taking you at your word.

I'm also making fun of you if you actually think that (1) false consciousness exists, and that (2) you can actually score debate points with it.

There.

No, i wasn't actually talking about "false consciousness" per se, but I was taking a jab at libertarian acquiescence to free-market capitalism. I do not find it to be as benevolent as some. Nor do I find it to be the natural expression of the human spirit-- as some would like everybody to believe.

And shit, I didn't know we were keeping score...:mad:

Efil's still winning anyway.

[Myrtle]

Efil's still winning anyway.

Where is Elfi... Efil... whatever. ? I kinda miss the bitching. :omg:

[CaptainBallz]

Where is Elfi... Efil... whatever. ? I kinda miss the bitching. :omg:

He's not starting threads elsewhere, hopefully.

EDIT: Just kidding, I take all kinds..

[Unregistered]

Where is Elfi... Efil... whatever. ? I kinda miss the bitching. :omg:

I think he resented the fact that we didn't put up with his whining. :shrug:

[CaptainBallz]

I think he resented the fact that we didn't put up with his whining. :shrug:

But it is YOU who is the Whiner...

whining about him....whining...or something

[Prope]

I have a co-worker with a little theory on this....

Iran is pissed about how 300 made the Persians look.

All of the Spartans were played by (mostly I think) British actors.

Could resentment over a movie be the reason why Iran captured the British crew?? Probably not the ONLY reason but there could be something to it.

[Myrtle]

Being against the War in Iraq as I am does not make it necessary to reflexively reduce any dialog about the war to "OMG amerikkka is teh capitalist-imperialist evil, always, 4ever and no matter whut."

I thought you leftward folks appreciated nuance...

By the way... I never said anything bad about America. My point was that we have no right to say that we should spread our democracy to other nations in the hopes of making them more "free" because we're not fucking God, it's not up to us to decide what is "right" and what is not. Obviously, take that with a grain of salt, of course I don't want people getting raped and murdered and being oppressed, etc... but at the same time, it's not our place to force our way of life upon them. So, in short, it's not freedom we're forcing on them over there, it's an American way of life.

And also, if this "war" were truly about freeing these people and helping them live a safer and less violent life, then we would have fucking been at work with a 50 other countries by now as well. This war has nothing to do with their freedom, it's about the fuckin' oil, period.

[StockdaleforVeep]

i'm sure they'll thank you and suck your dick shortly thereafter for allowing them to understand that their son/daughter died so towelheads could become more "free"

probably won't be the best beejer you ever had---those sorrow tears get in your peehole and sting something fierce. Trust me I know about the sorrow knobjob

The greatest generation didnt have a problem sacrificing their lives for some toad suckers in france. And there was a rather large anti war group in the 40s

[fquaye14ten]

the so-called greatest generation.

the ones during the era of institutionalized racism, the mccarthy trials, and so forth.

pretty great, dude.

[StockdaleforVeep]

By the way... I never said anything bad about America. My point was that we have no right to say that we should spread our democracy to other nations in the hopes of making them more "free" because we're not fucking God, it's not up to us to decide what is "right" and what is not. Obviously, take that with a grain of salt, of course I don't want people getting raped and murdered and being oppressed, etc... but at the same time, it's not our place to force our way of life upon them. So, in short, it's not freedom we're forcing on them over there, it's an American way of life.

And also, if this "war" were truly about freeing these people and helping them live a safer and less violent life, then we would have fucking been at work with a 50 other countries by now as well. This war has nothing to do with their freedom, it's about the fuckin' oil, period.

For a feminist, i am surprised you are not appalled by the treatment of women in these muslim nations. Taking the reason that "we have no right" then that would mean we should have no troops in north korea, no bases anywhere, and never been in any armed conflict other than against japan(other than war declaration, there was no reason to attack germany when "diplomatic reasons" could have been exhausted)

[StockdaleforVeep]

the so-called greatest generation.

the ones during the era of institutionalized racism, the mccarthy trials, and so forth.

pretty great, dude.

and we're still kickin arent we! :rock:

[fquaye14ten]

and i'm not saying that they shouldn't have been happy to give their lives for their country. that was an incredibly noble and brave thing to do. likewise for soldiers in iraq.

the key is to have them give their lives for a noble principle. that is probably what their parents would rather hear if they have to hear that their children gave their lives for their country.

for instance, even the most patriotic had their ideals quavered by the trumped up ethics behind entering the 'nam war. likewise here.

this is not wwII, nor is it wwI, nor is it the civil war, nor is it the revolutionary war.

this is the iraq war and it must be evaluate apart from the ideals that defined previous wars.

but then again, you know that...because you're not stupid, right?

[StockdaleforVeep]

and i'm not saying that they shouldn't have been happy to give their lives for their country. that was an incredibly noble and brave thing to do. likewise for soldiers in iraq.

the key is to have them give their lives for a noble principle. that is probably what their parents would rather hear if they have to hear that their children gave their lives for their country.

for instance, even the most patriotic had their ideals quavered by the trumped up ethics behind entering the 'nam war. likewise here.

this is not wwII, nor is it wwI, nor is it the civil war, nor is it the revolutionary war.

this is the iraq war and it must be evaluate apart from the ideals that defined previous wars.

but then again, you know that...because you're not stupid, right?

"noble" such as the words "good" and "evil" are defined differently by all

[fquaye14ten]

exactly---but we're talking about how the families of the soldiers feel. their definition, on the average, is going to probably mirror what the country tends to feel about the "nobility" of the war.

take your semantics elsewhere. basically all you're saying in this post is "people have different opinions if the war is good or bad, derrrrr"

[StockdaleforVeep]

just dont spit or protest the troops when they come back and i'll be happy

[fquaye14ten]

did anyone say they were going to?

quit changing the subject for christ sakes.

i have nothing but respect for our soldiers (or any soldiers for that matter) no matter what war or conflict they're involved in.

i'm sure squirtle would tell you the same (unless she's a douche)

[StockdaleforVeep]

did anyone say they were going to?

quit changing the subject for christ sakes.

i have nothing but respect for our soldiers (or any soldiers for that matter) no matter what war or conflict they're involved in.

i'm sure squirtle would tell you the same (unless she's a douche)

yes but since the vietnam parallel was drawn, it leads to that, esp with the large group of people who are anti war\troop. Yes there is the counter "support the troops" following but if people are saying "yeah you are fighting\dieing for nothing" that is an insult to them. Also, to say a reason to fight is not worth it is subjective

[getonbckthr]

What the fuck is "free" anyway? More Americanized? :jagoff:
Free is alot of things. Free is actually being able to vote for who you want to not being told to vote for Saddam or get beheaded, you don't honestly think he would get 100% of the votes do you? Freedom is being able to choose where you go to school and where you work. Freedom is you being able to wear whatever article of clothing you want, not just a robe and cloth over your face everyday. We seem to forget how lucky we actually have it yet our country is wrong because we dream of a day where the whole world can, like us, be able to choose what they want not be ordered to what the government wants.

[Myrtle]

Free is alot of things. Free is actually being able to vote for who you want to not being told to vote for Saddam or get beheaded, you don't honestly think he would get 100% of the votes do you? Freedom is being able to choose where you go to school and where you work. Freedom is you being able to wear whatever article of clothing you want, not just a robe and cloth over your face everyday. We seem to forget how lucky we actually have it yet our country is wrong because we dream of a day where the whole world can, like us, be able to choose what they want not be ordered to what the government wants.

Sure, I agree with that. That's the life that I want for myself. But they're not exactly getting the kinds of choices you think they are. In fact, none of what's actually going on over there was listen in your post... don't believe everything you hear on CNN, mmk?

And Stockdale, I am absolutely disgusted by the treatment of women in the middle east. But going over there and bombing them and forcing them to live in a democratic society is certainly not the answer.

[Myrtle]

Oh, also, you can't possibly expect someone to make a real choice about what kind of government they want when their life may depend on whatever decision they make. That, and the fact that these people have very little (if any) education on this shit and may not even understand what the fuck good a democracy is going to do for them.

[soxwon]

sean penn's the biggest ass EVER!!!!

[fquaye14ten]

yes but since the vietnam parallel was drawn, it leads to that, esp with the large group of people who are anti war\troop. Yes there is the counter "support the troops" following but if people are saying "yeah you are fighting\dieing for nothing" that is an insult to them. Also, to say a reason to fight is not worth it is subjective

it would seem to me that insult should fall on the politicians who sent them to a war with trumped up evidence of wmod

[soxwon]

Would you support a war with iran?
supose iran bombs israel?
What if Iran kills those british marines/sailors?

[fquaye14ten]

action should be taken against iran.

action SHOULD have been taken against iran more so than iraq given the reasoning bush gave for entering iraq.

however, full-scale military conflict isn't something we should seek in this matter (although it might be necessary)

[Myrtle]

action SHOULD have been taken against iran more so than iraq given the reasoning bush gave for entering iraq.


Yes, exactly. Bush is confused...

[getonbckthr]

Iraq had the shit, the problem was we gave him enough time to ship it out while we tried peacefully to disarm them.

[fquaye14ten]

um........

[Myrtle]

Iraq had the shit, the problem was we gave him enough time to ship it out while we tried peacefully to disarm them.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a359/myrtle72/shockawe.jpg

[1951Campbell]

the so-called greatest generation.

the ones during the era of institutionalized racism, the mccarthy trials, and so forth.

pretty great, dude.

Yes, defeating the Axis meant nothing.

:jagoff:

C'mon fquaye, you don't have to be all Tom Brokaw about 'em, but you don't have to be Howard Zinn either.

[fquaye14ten]

i just take exception to the "greatest" tag.

they're as flawed as any generation...and the society they perpetuated in America is probably the one I would least want to live in.

[1951Campbell]

Free is alot of things. Free is actually being able to vote for who you want to not being told to vote for Saddam or get beheaded, you don't honestly think he would get 100% of the votes do you? Freedom is being able to choose where you go to school and where you work. Freedom is you being able to wear whatever article of clothing you want, not just a robe and cloth over your face everyday. We seem to forget how lucky we actually have it yet our country is wrong because we dream of a day where the whole world can, like us, be able to choose what they want not be ordered to what the government wants.

That's all true, but we simply cannot take it upon ourselves to go out and make sure that every nation has that. It's just impossible and a waste of resources.

[1951Campbell]

they're as flawed as any generation...and the society they perpetuated in America is probably the one I would least want to live in.

Riiiiiiiight. Society was more open and free in 1840 than it was in 1940.. :rolleyes:

But then again, you know that's not the case because you're not stupid, right?

[Myrtle]

That's all true, but we simply cannot take it upon ourselves to go out and make sure that every nation has that. It's just impossible and a waste of resources.

Exactly. But then again... that's not the point of this war anyway.

[fquaye14ten]

Riiiiiiiight. Society was more open and free in 1840 than it was in 1940.. :rolleyes:

But then again, you know that's not the case because you're not stupid, right?

suck my fucking dick campbell:mad:

you're a smart guy so you know that the propaganda/media-centric mode of communication that caused so much hysteria in the 1950's did not exist in the 1840's.

And to be honest, slavery was shitty but guess what: if we even HAD statistics for lynchings, bombings, and cross-burnings my just kind of off the cuff guess would be that they were just a teensy weensy tad bit higher in 1940's.

oh ps---my grandmother spent the better part of 2 years in an internment camp about 100 miles from where i'm living now....which was pretty awesome.

but you keep on lionizing the "greatest" generation....and i'll keep on thinking you're the piece of shit you so apparently are

[1951Campbell]

suck my fucking dick campbell:mad:

you're a smart guy so you know that the propaganda/media-centric mode of communication that caused so much hysteria in the 1950's did not exist in the 1840's.

And to be honest, slavery was shitty but guess what: if we even HAD statistics for lynchings, bombings, and cross-burnings my just kind of off the cuff guess would be that they were just a teensy weensy tad bit higher in 1940's.

oh ps---my grandmother spent the better part of 2 years in an internment camp about 100 miles from where i'm living now....which was pretty awesome.

but you keep on lionizing the "greatest" generation....and i'll keep on thinking you're the piece of shit you so apparently are

Piece of shit? :(

[fquaye14ten]

yeah. i pretty much hate you right now

[Myrtle]

yeah. i pretty much hate you right now

I'm going to report this post. :hello:

[Palehose13]

Didnt bring up vietnam because that was a draft and a different issue. I would say though i would be one of the few applauding them, not spitting on them

With your attitude I think you should just put your money where your mouth is (http://www.goarmy.com/contact/how_to_join.jsp?hmref=cs).

By the way... I never said anything bad about America. My point was that we have no right to say that we should spread our democracy to other nations in the hopes of making them more "free" because we're not fucking God, it's not up to us to decide what is "right" and what is not. Obviously, take that with a grain of salt, of course I don't want people getting raped and murdered and being oppressed, etc... but at the same time, it's not our place to force our way of life upon them. So, in short, it's not freedom we're forcing on them over there, it's an American way of life.

And also, if this "war" were truly about freeing these people and helping them live a safer and less violent life, then we would have fucking been at work with a 50 other countries by now as well. This war has nothing to do with their freedom, it's about the fuckin' oil, period.

For a feminist, i am surprised you are not appalled by the treatment of women in these muslim nations. Taking the reason that "we have no right" then that would mean we should have no troops in north korea, no bases anywhere, and never been in any armed conflict other than against japan(other than war declaration, there was no reason to attack germany when "diplomatic reasons" could have been exhausted)

Sure, I agree with that. That's the life that I want for myself. But they're not exactly getting the kinds of choices you think they are. In fact, none of what's actually going on over there was listen in your post... don't believe everything you hear on CNN, mmk?

And Stockdale, I am absolutely disgusted by the treatment of women in the middle east. But going over there and bombing them and forcing them to live in a democratic society is certainly not the answer.

No country can be "free" nor will a "movement" work unless it started from within. It is not for us to say "that is not how you treat women" or anything else about their life. It would be like them crashing airplanes into skyscrapers and telling us that they don't like our lifestyle. If the women of the middle east want to change things, THEY will have to be the ones to change it. We can supply information and any other help if they want it, but it is not for us to force anyone to change their lifestyle.

just dont spit or protest the troops when they come back and i'll be happy

How about you fast forward about 3 decades? Who the hell said anything like that? I guess you missed that the people wanting to bring the troops home are the liberal assholes.

[StockdaleforVeep]

action should be taken against iran.

action SHOULD have been taken against iran more so than iraq given the reasoning bush gave for entering iraq.

however, full-scale military conflict isn't something we should seek in this matter (although it might be necessary)

So you are for acting after the attack and damage has been done

[fquaye14ten]

good point. i can see how you got that from my post. you're dyslexic right? :rolleyes:

[StockdaleforVeep]

With your attitude I think you should just put your money where your mouth is (http://www.goarmy.com/contact/how_to_join.jsp?hmref=cs).







No country can be "free" nor will a "movement" work unless it started from within. It is not for us to say "that is not how you treat women" or anything else about their life. It would be like them crashing airplanes into skyscrapers and telling us that they don't like our lifestyle. If the women of the middle east want to change things, THEY will have to be the ones to change it. We can supply information and any other help if they want it, but it is not for us to force anyone to change their lifestyle.



How about you fast forward about 3 decades? Who the hell said anything like that? I guess you missed that the people wanting to bring the troops home are the liberal assholes.

Could not join the airforce when i was younger, im not in the greatest shape, my math sucks, i wore glasses and i have left eye dominance and am right handed

[Myrtle]

just dont spit or protest the troops when they come back and i'll be happy

I support the troops 100%

...which is why I don't want them going to Iraq in the first place.

[Palehose13]

Could not join the airforce when i was younger, im not in the greatest shape, my math sucks, i wore glasses and i have left eye dominance and am right handed

http://www.mshiltonj.com/jen/etc/geek.jpg

[chisoxtony]

The invasion of Iraq was a mistake..pure and simple (this is my opinion though)....and I am not a pacifist..a liberal..left wing or anything like that. My dad joined the Marines and served in Vietnam for six years. I grew up with a very conservative view (military wise) and still have a lot of conservative viewpoints....

However...

If the United States is attacked...or one country invades or attacks another and the U.S. steps in and even goes to war to defend that country....then I believe that war is justifed.

But this wasn't the case with the Iraq war...

The invasion of Iraq was done on false grounds (remember the weapons of mass destruction?). Unlike the first gulf war which was unilateral..and was also done AFTER Iraq invaded Kuwait..this one was started on false pretenses with absolutely no international support (with the exception of the United Kingdom). Even a lot of members of Bushes own party knew this was a mistake from the beginning (i/e Colin Powell). I agree 100% that Sadam was a horrible person..and that woman are treated extremely badly in Iraq and most of that region of the world. But that's not the reason why we were told we were going to war. If you are going to invade a country..you better damn well have you're information correct before you start the invasion.

So now Sadam is gone..you know what..Sadam HATED terrorists. He executed them. Do you think maybe Sadam was a dictator because that's the type of person that was needed to run a country with so many extremists? Now that he's gone..what do you think will happen? You don't think someone 50 times worse might come into power? The U.S. lifted the Pandora's box big time when we chose to invade Iraq and remove Sadam from power.

And I used to be a Republican..and most Republicans I know disagreed with the decision Bush made.

But I could be wrong...like I said..this is my opinion and not one persons opinion should ever be treated as fact.

[CaptainBallz]

I forget who had to bomb this country in order for us to begin having some form of women's rights or labor rights or civil rights or gay rights, etc, etc, etc...

Oh yeah, it was the damn pinkos n' friends.... sans bombs, of course, but I can see how they'd be considered the best option. :rolleyes:

[Palehose13]

I forget who had to bomb this country in order for us to begin having some form of women's rights or labor rights or civil rights or gay rights, etc, etc, etc...

Oh yeah, it was the damn pinkos n' friends.... sans bombs, of course, but I can see how they'd be considered the best option. :rolleyes:

Gay rights? Which ones are you thinking of? The right not to get the shit beat out you? ;)

[StockdaleforVeep]

http://www.mshiltonj.com/jen/etc/geek.jpg

Dont get how thats supposed to be a joke at me but whatever, you wrong people do have wrong genes ;)

[StockdaleforVeep]

The invasion of Iraq was a mistake..pure and simple (this is my opinion though)....and I am not a pacifist..a liberal..left wing or anything like that. My dad joined the Marines and served in Vietnam for six years. I grew up with a very conservative view (military wise) and still have a lot of conservative viewpoints....

However...

If the United States is attacked...or one country invades or attacks another and the U.S. steps in and even goes to war to defend that country....then I believe that war is justifed.

But this wasn't the case with the Iraq war...

The invasion of Iraq was done on false grounds (remember the weapons of mass destruction?). Unlike the first gulf war which was unilateral..and was also done AFTER Iraq invaded Kuwait..this one was started on false pretenses with absolutely no international support (with the exception of the United Kingdom). Even a lot of members of Bushes own party knew this was a mistake from the beginning (i/e Colin Powell). I agree 100% that Sadam was a horrible person..and that woman are treated extremely badly in Iraq and most of that region of the world. But that's not the reason why we were told we were going to war. If you are going to invade a country..you better damn well have you're information correct before you start the invasion.

So now Sadam is gone..you know what..Sadam HATED terrorists. He executed them. Do you think maybe Sadam was a dictator because that's the type of person that was needed to run a country with so many extremists? Now that he's gone..what do you think will happen? You don't think someone 50 times worse might come into power? The U.S. lifted the Pandora's box big time when we chose to invade Iraq and remove Sadam from power.

And I used to be a Republican..and most Republicans I know disagreed with the decision Bush made.

But I could be wrong...like I said..this is my opinion and not one persons opinion should ever be treated as fact.

saddam gave the famlies of hamas suicide bombers "rewards" for the cost to their family for the attacks on israel, id call that supporting terrorism

[chisoxtony]

saddam gave the famlies of hamas suicide bombers "rewards" for the cost to their family for the attacks on israel, id call that supporting terrorism

Crap..:o I'd forgotten about that (you are right)...

Still, he did execute a lot of terrorists also in Iraq..

[StockdaleforVeep]

Crap..:o I'd forgotten about that (you are right)...

Still, he did execute a lot of terrorists also in Iraq..


Terrorists of what cause? One's that were against his regime or ones like hamas and al queda and other ones?

Also, most of the insurgents in iraq now were part of the pro saddam regime, if they were pro saddam, wouldnt they be hypocritical in helping al queda cells in iraq?

[Palehose13]

Dont get how thats supposed to be a joke at me but whatever, you wrong people do have wrong genes ;)

*sigh*

[kittle42]

When is it time to bomb IRAN?
After what they did capturing British naval crew.
They have admitted they want Israel GONE.
When do we strike?
And will a democrat president go in and bomb, or simply try to NEGOTIATE?

I encourage you and "Da Reverand" to personally lead this strike against Iran. Wear an American flag, a photo of Jesus, and a sign that says "Allah is the one god and Mohammed sucked his cock" in Arabic.

Only then will you be a true freedom-fighting American. Otherwise, you're a pussy.

[Palehose13]

I encourage you and "Da Reverand" to personally lead this strike against Iran. Wear an American flag, a photo of Jesus, and a sign that says "Allah is the one god and Mohammed sucked his cock" in Arabic.

Only then will you be a true freedom-fighting American. Otherwise, you're a pussy.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

[CaptainBallz]

I encourage you and "Da Reverand" to personally lead this strike against Iran. Wear an American flag, a photo of Jesus, and a sign that says "Allah is the one god and Mohammed sucked his cock" in Arabic.

Only then will you be a true freedom-fighting American. Otherwise, you're a pussy.

They don't call em "chicken-hawks" for nothing...

[Unregistered]

I encourage you and "Da Reverand" to personally lead this strike against Iran. Wear an American flag, a photo of Jesus, and a sign that says "Allah is the one god and Mohammed sucked his cock" in Arabic.

Only then will you be a true freedom-fighting American. Otherwise, you're a pussy.

Isn't Soxwon and "Da Reverend" the same guy?

[JohnBasedowYoda]

Iran scares me.


Anyone see the show on MSNBC called War Diaries by Richard Engel? Haunting footage and viewpoints.

[Bonzosa]

Couple of points on this issue:
1. Where do we get the troops w/o instituting a draft Americans will not support?
2. Most countries have a beef with Israel, as do I. Why exactly is it ok to create a country out of nothing, supply them all the technology and firepower to destroy other countries. This is on top of the fact they can freely go into Lebanon and other countries to launch attacks while the US supports them. This on top of repressing Palestinians within their own country.
3. What Republicans will support another war when they are already distancing themselves from the current one. Note: see '06 election.
4. How would the executive branch fund a war with Iran when there is speak of limiting spending on the current one?
5. Those thinking we should go into Iran need to turn off the Bill O'Reilly, Fox News and Michael Savage.
6. Iraq will not be stable for at least another decade. We will be there for a long time. Note: see the fact Bush finally called Iraq a civil war a couple weeks ago.
7. American intervention in the Middle East stirs up more Anti-American sentiment and wanna-be terrorists seeking revenge on us for invading their land.
8. We don't have the will to step in Sudan, but Iran is a good idea?
9. The IAEA says Iran is years off from having nuclear capability.
10. If we spend 4 billion (a bargain) a year for less than a decade, we can eliminate all the old soviet nuclear material from the black market, which it makes a majority of.
11. We can avoid trampling on the Middle East is we develop more energy independence. This means increasing MPG requirements, admitting this ethanol business is BS and including Toyota and foreign automakers in the conversation about decreasing oil dependency.

That's a start...

[SABRSox]

Iran scares me.


Anyone see the show on MSNBC called War Diaries by Richard Engel? Haunting footage and viewpoints.

I thought the latest Frontline look at Iran was better.

As for going to war in Iran (which I am against), I don't see how it is possible. Our military resources are, for the most part, depleted.

I understand that Ahmadinejad is a total nut, but you've got to look at the circumstances which led to his rise to power. His election was a reaction to American agression in the Middle East. US forces were in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Those countries sandwich Iran, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the next target for Bush. So the people of Iran, afraid, turn to the guy that used the same fear tactics Bush used to draw the US into Iraq.

Personally, I believe that if US presence in the middle east is decreased, the moderates in Iran will push Ahmadinejad back out of office. But that's got to happen sooner, rather than later. He's up for reelection in 2009.

[StockdaleforVeep]

Couple of points on this issue:
1. Where do we get the troops w/o instituting a draft Americans will not support?
2. Most countries have a beef with Israel, as do I. Why exactly is it ok to create a country out of nothing, supply them all the technology and firepower to destroy other countries. This is on top of the fact they can freely go into Lebanon and other countries to launch attacks while the US supports them. This on top of repressing Palestinians within their own country.
3. What Republicans will support another war when they are already distancing themselves from the current one. Note: see '06 election.
4. How would the executive branch fund a war with Iran when there is speak of limiting spending on the current one?
5. Those thinking we should go into Iran need to turn off the Bill O'Reilly, Fox News and Michael Savage.
6. Iraq will not be stable for at least another decade. We will be there for a long time. Note: see the fact Bush finally called Iraq a civil war a couple weeks ago.
7. American intervention in the Middle East stirs up more Anti-American sentiment and wanna-be terrorists seeking revenge on us for invading their land.
8. We don't have the will to step in Sudan, but Iran is a good idea?
9. The IAEA says Iran is years off from having nuclear capability.
10. If we spend 4 billion (a bargain) a year for less than a decade, we can eliminate all the old soviet nuclear material from the black market, which it makes a majority of.
11. We can avoid trampling on the Middle East is we develop more energy independence. This means increasing MPG requirements, admitting this ethanol business is BS and including Toyota and foreign automakers in the conversation about decreasing oil dependency.

That's a start...

1. iran is recognized as a global threat and it would most likely be a joint-op in iran.
2. i am pro israeli
3. See 1, the UN has reports and the issue of irans nuclear enrichment program. This would be similar to if we decided to invade north korea, most americans would agree iran and NK are a threat
4. You cant compare the iraq and coming iran war.
5. what about the bbc? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4031603.stm
6. i agree, look how long it took for the colonies to become unified and a collective after the rev war and civ war(yes, in the 1860s they werent colonies but then were sep nations)
7. the EU is heavily involved in iran
8. i cant explain that
9. So we should allow that timetable to shrink? Its bad enough we have pakistan and india neighbors and nuclear capable. Thankfully at the moment they hate each other and not us.
10. why is russia not the one flippin the bill on their garbage?
11. We need less involvement in japan for our auto industry, its because of them that chrysler is being sold, ford is going bankrupt and gm is falling at a slower rate.

point of all as i have stated, the UN and EU are together on an Iran resolution, this is not a US thing. Ofcorpse, russia and china are too limp dicked to have any thought on the issue and keep quiet

[StockdaleforVeep]

I thought the latest Frontline look at Iran was better.

As for going to war in Iran (which I am against), I don't see how it is possible. Our military resources are, for the most part, depleted.

I understand that Ahmadinejad is a total nut, but you've got to look at the circumstances which led to his rise to power. His election was a reaction to American agression in the Middle East. US forces were in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Those countries sandwich Iran, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the next target for Bush. So the people of Iran, afraid, turn to the guy that used the same fear tactics Bush used to draw the US into Iraq.

Personally, I believe that if US presence in the middle east is decreased, the moderates in Iran will push Ahmadinejad back out of office. But that's got to happen sooner, rather than later. He's up for reelection in 2009.

Before clinton took office, we were a nation that had the military resources to be able to fight three wars at the same time in three different theaters. Now after clinton, we became a nation thats barely able to fight 1 1\2, thanks billy boy

[SABRSox]

Before clinton took office, we were a nation that had the military resources to be able to fight three wars at the same time in three different theaters. Now after clinton, we became a nation thats barely able to fight 1 1\2, thanks billy boy

:rolleyes:

Rumsfeld did more damage to the military than Clinton ever did.

[StockdaleforVeep]

:rolleyes:

Rumsfeld did more damage to the military than Clinton ever did.

Takes a big man though to visit the troops one last time after his resignation to bid farewell

[SABRSox]

Takes a big man though to visit the troops one last time after his resignation to bid farewell

Who cares?

http://planetsean.blogspot.com/Spc%20Thomas%20Wilson.jpg
“Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles?”

http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2002/US/11/14/rumsfeld.iraq/story.rumsfeld.intvu.jpg
“You go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you might want or wish to have.”

Asshole. Up-armoring meant a poor bottom line for Rumsfeld's corporate army. How many lives were lost because of those kinds of decisisions. Hundreds, maybe thousands.

http://www.phillyist.com/attachments/philly_nicole/mission-accomplished.jpg

[Prope]

I forget who had to bomb this country in order for us to begin having some form of women's rights or labor rights or civil rights or gay rights, etc, etc, etc...

Oh yeah, it was the damn pinkos n' friends.... sans bombs, of course, but I can see how they'd be considered the best option. :rolleyes:
http://poisonkitchen.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/whateverhappened.jpg

[Palehose13]

Before clinton took office, we were a nation that had the military resources to be able to fight three wars at the same time in three different theaters. Now after clinton, we became a nation thats barely able to fight 1 1\2, thanks billy boy

Yeah, Clinton (http://clinton2.nara.gov/WH/EOP/OP/Budget2000/surplus.html) sure fucked up fiscally.

[CaptainBallz]

Takes a big man though to visit the troops one last time after his resignation to bid farewell

you're funny.

[StockdaleforVeep]

Who cares?

http://planetsean.blogspot.com/Spc%20Thomas%20Wilson.jpg
“Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles?”

http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2002/US/11/14/rumsfeld.iraq/story.rumsfeld.intvu.jpg
“You go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you might want or wish to have.”

Asshole. Up-armoring meant a poor bottom line for Rumsfeld's corporate army. How many lives were lost because of those kinds of decisisions. Hundreds, maybe thousands.

http://www.phillyist.com/attachments/philly_nicole/mission-accomplished.jpg

It should be noted that many libs voted against ceramic body armor for the troops, notably john kerry.

[Unregistered]

:100posts:

[kittle42]

Much like most political debate, it seems some people here will support anyone with a (D) or (R) next to his or her name depending on what political party the person identifies with.

Disgusting.

[StockdaleforVeep]

Yeah, Clinton (http://clinton2.nara.gov/WH/EOP/OP/Budget2000/surplus.html) sure fucked up fiscally.

Yes, because clinton liked to maintain the status quo on global issues, he shrank the military, gee, thats where money came from, that and he had the blind luck of being in term during the tech boom and was fortunate to end his presidency as the bubble has popped. By shrinking the military and not updating the military for modern times, it simply deferred the cost to later generations\presidents, such as current President Bush. Had he invested in...say national defense, maybe first trade center bombing coulda been avoided and oklahoma city and invested in the military, zimbabwe embassy bombing would not had occured, the USS cole, and more. But he was a nifty speaker so nobody cares right? Who cares if americans are killed overseas, shouldnt have been there in the first place right?:jagoff:

[StockdaleforVeep]

Much like most political debate, it seems some people here will support anyone with a (D) or (R) next to his or her name depending on what political party the person identifies with.

Disgusting.

Personally, i support ideals, not party. Some dems get my vote, some reps get my vote. For dekalb, none of the garbage dems get my vote here

[Palehose13]

Yes, because clinton liked to maintain the status quo on global issues, he shrank the military, gee, thats where money came from, that and he had the blind luck of being in term during the tech boom and was fortunate to end his presidency as the bubble has popped. By shrinking the military and not updating the military for modern times, it simply deferred the cost to later generations\presidents, such as current President Bush. Had he invested in...say national defense, maybe first trade center bombing coulda been avoided and oklahoma city and invested in the military, zimbabwe embassy bombing would not had occured, the USS cole, and more. But he was a nifty speaker so nobody cares right? Who cares if americans are killed overseas, shouldnt have been there in the first place right?:jagoff:

I'm not going to waste anymore keystrokes on you in regards to this.

[LuvSox]

Much like most political debate, it seems some people here will support anyone with a (D) or (R) next to his or her name depending on what political party the person identifies with.

Disgusting.

LuvSox (D-runk)

[StockdaleforVeep]

I'm not going to waste anymore keystrokes on you in regards to this.

You can cock stroke me instead

[maurice]

And will a democrat president go in and bomb, or simply try to NEGOTIATE?

Hopefully negotiate. Unfortunately, we'll have to wait until at least 2008 to find out.

The bigger question is, what happens if Israel bombs Iran? How do Iran and the Arab nations respond? Then WTF do we do?
:(

[StockdaleforVeep]

Hopefully negotiate. Unfortunately, we'll have to wait until at least 2008 to find out.

The bigger question is, what happens if Israel bombs Iran? How do Iran and the Arab nations respond? Then WTF do we do?
:(

Would they be the first to attack? I dont think israel retaliated when iraq retaliated to the US saving kuwait by firing scuds at israel

[maurice]

However, under Bush, government is even bigger and they spend even more.

QFT. Why can't we have a major political party that advocates smaller government?

[maurice]

Would they be the first to attack?

Definitely maybe. I'm sure they have a plan for a pre-emptive strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. Israel is at great risk if Iran can build a nuke. Plus, they're already POed over the way Iran helped sink one of their ships.

[StockdaleforVeep]

QFT. Why can't we have a major political party that advocates smaller government?

Because when smaller govt occurs, people want more help and want more govt involvement, then it gets "too much govt bad"

there is no creamy middle

Just like the idea of nat'l defense

People say not enough is done for the safety of the nation, then something probably happens to them and they said "damn this govt and their nazi security"

[StockdaleforVeep]

Definitely maybe. I'm sure they have a plan for a pre-emptive strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. Israel is at great risk if Iran can build a nuke. Plus, they're already POed over the way Iran helped sink one of their ships.

Right but i think israel's primary concern is still palestine

[maurice]

A nuclear Iran would be an immediate threat to wipe Israel off the map with a nuke - likelihood: unknown.

Palestinians are a long-term threat to wipe Israel off the map through relative birthrates - likelihood: almost certain.

[StockdaleforVeep]

A nuclear Iran would be an immediate threat to wipe Israel off the map with a nuke - likelihood: unknown.

Palestinians are a long-term threat to wipe Israel off the map through relative birthrates - likelihood: almost certain.

Right but is Iran prepared for a M.A.D issue?

[JohnBasedowYoda]

suddenly East Timor sounds good

[JohnBasedowYoda]

You can cock stroke me instead




Myrtle thinks you're an idiot I think you rule

[fquaye14ten]

1004180


what does that say?


it's a rdidle?!

[Palehose13]

You can cock stroke me instead

Should I bring tweezers and a magnifying glass or do you have those readily available?

[fquaye14ten]

:)

[StockdaleforVeep]

Should I bring tweezers and a magnifying glass or do you have those readily available?

http://www.fanfic.net/~jeffwong/enzyte.jpg

[Bonzosa]

1. iran is recognized as a global threat and it would most likely be a joint-op in iran.
2. i am pro israeli
3. See 1, the UN has reports and the issue of irans nuclear enrichment program. This would be similar to if we decided to invade north korea, most americans would agree iran and NK are a threat
4. You cant compare the iraq and coming iran war.
5. what about the bbc? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4031603.stm
6. i agree, look how long it took for the colonies to become unified and a collective after the rev war and civ war(yes, in the 1860s they werent colonies but then were sep nations)
7. the EU is heavily involved in iran
8. i cant explain that
9. So we should allow that timetable to shrink? Its bad enough we have pakistan and india neighbors and nuclear capable. Thankfully at the moment they hate each other and not us.
10. why is russia not the one flippin the bill on their garbage?
11. We need less involvement in japan for our auto industry, its because of them that chrysler is being sold, ford is going bankrupt and gm is falling at a slower rate.

point of all as i have stated, the UN and EU are together on an Iran resolution, this is not a US thing. Ofcorpse, russia and china are too limp dicked to have any thought on the issue and keep quiet

1. You are sorely mistaken if you think that other countries have the cohones to go into Iran. Europe didn't even do anything in Kosovo, and that was in their freakin' back yard. Who in Europe will support war? The French? No. The Germans? Don't think so. UK? They are already sick of war within Iran, good luck convincing the public that invading Iran is a good idea.

2. Good for you. I have nothing against Jewish people, I do have an issue with the hypocrisy of supporting Israel's aggression while condemning other countries. Israel freely changes it's borders with Palestinians and Lebanon while the US deters others from doing the same. Golan Heights? Thats Lebanese, not Israeli.

3. They are a threat, no argument there. The question is whether you can convince the public and whether congressmen and women are willing to put their elected post in jeopardy when this country is getting tired oif war. This war has lasted longer than our involvement in WW1 WW2 Civil War and War of Independence.

4. It is not a comparison. It is a notion of public sentiment towards war at the time and that Americans are tired of the cost in $ and especially lives. Congress is attempting to limit the scope of war. That does not fare well for starting another one.

5. That article is no editorial, it's a Q and A. Where does it say we should go to war?

6. Amen.

7. What does the EU involvement prove? Does that mean they won't burn our flags and hold protests against our country? Fact: counter insurgency groups rise in popularity the longer we occupy a land. This creates a larger problem in Iraq now and would not be any different in Iran. We add gunpowder to Al Qaeda claims and beliefs.

8. Oil is the difference. Iran threatens security of a resource we are dependent on.

9. What I am saying is that if you limit their ability to acquire nuclear material, they will have no capability. See point 10 from my original post.

10. The material is spread among former Soviet states. Many do not have the resources to dispose of the material, some raise money by selling it. These states had to essentially dismantle their entire Navy, Army etc. The nuclear material is just sitting around.

11. That is not why American automakers are in trouble. Pensions are the reason. All the pensions given out over the years are weighing them down heavily. On top of that, American automakers bet on making larger vehicles like SUVs and trucks. Toyota bet on fuel efficient vehicles, safety and warranties. They won that bet.
It's not Japan's fault, it's the lack of ingenuity in the US auto industry.
Their cars are crap.
However their trucks are the best (Nissan and Toyota are closing in though).

China and Russia keep our enemies as friends because it is good business for them. Iran won't sell resources to us so they get them.
China is very unique in that it is merely searching for resources. They do not care to condemn countries for human rights abuses or border issues. They seek to secure what they need and let others meddle in human rights etc.

:)

[StockdaleforVeep]

8. Oil is the difference. Iran threatens security of a resource we are dependent on.


Hugo chavez is sitting on one of the richest non opec nations in the world and is an enemy of ours, in our geographic theater, and for a while, had his govt destabilize due to money issues. If everything is about oil, wouldnt it be cheaper to go after him?

[Bonzosa]

Hugo chavez is sitting on one of the richest non opec nations in the world and is an enemy of ours, in our geographic theater, and for a while, had his govt destabilize due to money issues. If everything is about oil, wouldnt it be cheaper to go after him?

I wouldn't say he is an enemy, more like we don't care for each other.
Venezuela has given no reason to invade besides the fact he talks negatively about our president. But, if Wolfowitz and Rove had their way, we would probably want to go in there too.

[StockdaleforVeep]

I wouldn't say he is an enemy, more like we don't care for each other.
Venezuela has given no reason to invade besides the fact he talks negatively about our president. But, if Wolfowitz and Rove had their way, we would probably want to go in there too.

When their economy was plummeting due to recession and riots were happening in cities due to it, it would have given the US the excuse to "peacekeep"

[itsnotrequired]

white sox baseball

[fquaye14ten]

i can't WAIT for the offseason to be over so we can finalllllly stop talking about iraq-war exit strategies

[Deuce]

Starts on Monday. :)

Thank God. I need something to distract me from Stockdale's lunacies about what "all of the Arab states" do.

Deuce

[StockdaleforVeep]

Thank God. I need something to distract me from Stockdale's lunacies about what "all of the Arab states" do.

Deuce

Im not as big a lunatic as some here, you have to admit that

[JohnBasedowYoda]

Im not as big a lunatic as some here, you have to admit that

who:omg:'d you have in mind

[CaptainBallz]

Im not as big a lunatic as some here, you have to admit that

Anyone, anyone??

http://www.confluence.org/ym/all/n16e047/pic4.jpg

:tumbleweed:

[StockdaleforVeep]

who:omg:'d you have in mind

I dont think 9\11 is a govt coverup

[JohnBasedowYoda]

Nice, Ballz

[JohnBasedowYoda]

I dont think 9\11 is a govt coverup

Wh:omg: d:omg:es?

[cbotnyse]

I'm way late to this thread but Iran can and wants to be a huge problem for the USA. It will get ugly before it gets better.

[StockdaleforVeep]

I'm way late to this thread but Iran can and wants to be a huge problem for the USA. It will get ugly before it gets better.

Theyre not helpin with their show of "hey, we got nukes for cocks, what u gonna do about it, we have your sailors(england)"

[StockdaleforVeep]

Wh:omg: d:omg:es?

http://www.soxandthecity.net/forums/showthread.php?t=182&page=2

read after

[soxwon]

How do you say "MUSHROOM CLOUD" in Arabic?
is that what they speak there?

[maurice]

If you're asking whether people in Iran primarily speak Arabic, the answer is no.

[Palehose13]

Theyre not helpin with their show of "hey, we got nukes for cocks, what u gonna do about it, we have your sailors(england)"

So the USofA is the only country allowed to have that philosophy?

[StockdaleforVeep]

So the USofA is the only country allowed to have that philosophy?

When is the last time the United States even threatened nuclear attacking? Vietnam? Iran wants to develop to use

Im actually amazed we havent seen a mushroom cloud in Kashmir yet.

and there are UN treaty's forbidding countries from developing it

[Palehose13]

When is the last time the United States even threatened nuclear attacking? Vietnam? Iran wants to develop to use

Im actually amazed we havent seen a mushroom cloud in Kashmir yet.

and there are UN treaty's forbidding countries from developing it

The cold war.

Has anyone other than the US actually dropped a nuclear bomb on another country?

[StockdaleforVeep]

The cold war.

Has anyone other than the US actually dropped a nuclear bomb on another country?

No, because we were the first to develop it and first to use and thankfully the last to use

and vietnam was during the cold war, but vietnam was the only country that was directly threatened to be bombed if they didnt comply, M.A.D was a constant issue during the cold war. The US policy was that they'd retaliate if attacked but never first strike

[Deuce]

Im not as big a lunatic as some here, you have to admit that

Oh so true...

[the fluffer]

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/images/nukeart2.jpg

[SoxEd]

Iran has seized some of our sailors, and is parading them all over its TV to make loads of bullshit 'apologies' for invading their waters, demands to leave Iraq, etc

Why?

1) Iran realises that the US, and its premier Client Kingdom (the UK) have foolishly abandoned the successful military strategy of Hegemonic Defense, and have instead got sucked into a war in the Middle East, in which they have reached the point of overstretch*;

2) Iran realises that its nuclear facilities are going to be the subject of a pre-emptive military strike by the USA's regional Client Kingdom (Israel) very soon;

3) Iran is deliberately trying to draw the US/UK/Israel into attacking it, in order to generate an upsurge of anti-Western feeling across the Muslim world, and to (from the Iranian POV) hopefully ignite a region-wide anti-Western military uprising;

4) Iran knows that we do NOT have the resources (economic or military) to fight popular counter-insurgencies across the whole of Iraq and the whole of Iran at the same time;

5) IF we were to invade Iran, then we would also have to invade Syria;

6) in short, wrt to Iran, we've painted ourselves into a very sticky corner, and have played into Ahmedinajad's hands completely;

7) Whilst the regime of Ahemdinajad is undoubtedly using my countrymen for propaganda purposes, if you are inclined to uncritically accept Mr. Bliar's statement that our guys were in Iraqi waters when they were seized, then I have a very nice bridge to sell you (cf Mrs. Thatcher's blatant lying to Parliament about the British Airways flight that landed in Kuwait six hours after Gulf War 1 started. She lied about the time it landed - because she knew that we had used it to insert Special Forces forward observers into Kuwait City.);

8) the era of American global hegemony has been brought to an end, and your country's standing in the world has been irretrievably damaged, merely to further increase the already-sybaritic wealth of some of Mr. Cheney*'s friends and fellow-travellers in large Corporations.

9) Should we fall into Iran's trap, and get sucked in to War with Iran (that, btw, we can NOT win without resorting to the aggressive use of Nuclear weapons), more and more British and American families will see their sons and daughters coming home in body bags, or with parts of their bodies (or minds) missing - and all for no justifiable purpose whatever.

If we were to invade Iran and lose, then we would be humbled beyond measure across the globe, and if we were to invade and be forced to resort to the use of nukes to win, then we would be shamed beyond measure.

Dick Cheney and his neocon Robber (Oil) Baron friends have sacrificed our nations' reputations (and the lives of so many of our brave service personnel) on the altar of their personal greed.

:mad: :mad: :mad:

* It was precisely this arrogant strategic error that demonstrated to their enemies that the Roman Legions were not invincible, actually, and nether were they infinite - after which everyone rose up against Rome, and her Empire collapsed. Starting with the people who lived in the area that we nowadays call 'Iran'.

Of course, the situation with regard to the Pax Americana now is slightly different to the one that the Romans faced, as the Iraq War was not undertaken in the interests of America, her people, or her allies - but was instead SOLELY about seizing the Iraqi Oilfields for the Halliburton Corporation, along with a few other Corporate backers.

*Although I am not a religious man, I regard Dick Cheney as Satan's Personal Representative on Earth.

One need only look at his career in the Nixon and Ford administrations, or his support for the Apartheid regime in South Africa.
Once you then examine his actions at Halliburton, and add-in his 'under the radar' approach to being Veep, a picture arises of a man who revels in Machiavellian scheming, fiscal legerdemain, and amoral exploitation of anyone he can, in the name solely of Personal Gain.

As you 'may' be able to tell, I find it very difficult indeed to preserve any degree of objectivity when considering any undertaking that has been initiated/run/influenced by Cheney.

[Myrtle]

Sheesh, Ed. You could have spaced that out and practically doubled your post count.

:thumbsup:

[StockdaleforVeep]

Iran is proving to the world they are not rational. Proof shows the sailors were not in iranian waters and everyone knows that the "apologies" dont mean shit

If anything, UK should apologize, and when they get their sailors back, bomb the living shit out them. I am saddened the european union seems to be doing nothing to help england in this

[SoxEd]

Iran is proving to the world they are not rational.

I disagree - I think it shows that Ahmedinajad is a gambler, and I think that he is correct in his assessment that we are not in a position to respond militarily.

I think that he is trying to convey our lack of invincibility to the rest of the Arab world, so that he can then push on to building an Iranian Nuclear Deterrent.
Which, however ghastly we think the Iranian Govt is, we can hardly blame them for when we look at our own long history of actions towards sovereign states that we happen to dislike.

It certainly shows that his Govt has no respect for the decencies of International Law - but then we are hardly in a position to kvetch about that, are we?


Proof shows the sailors were not in iranian waters and everyone knows that the "apologies" dont mean shit


What 'proof'?

The 'word' of Anthony Bliar?

Only the sailors of the two navies could know for certain where the capture took place, and neither group could hardly be considered 'impartial' in this matter.


If anything, UK should apologize, and when they get their sailors back, bomb the living shit out them.


We do not have the resources to attack Iran.
The regimes of Thatcher, Major and Bliar has successively downgraded our Military until we have reached the point where we are at now - which is to say that we can ONLY operate as an adjunct to American forces.

Bliar's last Defence 'Review' even admitted this fact explicitly!

If a fascist Argentinian Dictator invaded the Falklands now, then we'd just have to wave the islands goodbye, along with the rights of the British families who live on them.

Bliar should IMO be tried for the traitor that he is.


I am saddened the european union seems to be doing nothing to help england in this

There's nothing that the EU can do about this:
for one thing the EU has no 'Armed Forces' at its disposal;

for another, Ahmedinajad is not going to listen to 'diplomacy' on this - unless we accept that he has the right to Nuclear Weapons of his own, and that isn't going to happen anytime soon;

for a third, I bet the French are having too good of a time laughing their arses off at us to do anything to resolve the situation.

Ahmedinajad has us by the short-and-curlies, and he knows it.
:(

EDIT: This situation is just another example of the 'blowback' resulting from the invasion of Iraq.

George HW Bush did NOT invade Iraq when he had the chance - but then he was a man who had not only served in WW2, but who had also run the CIA, and who had already been Veep for eight years by the time he became POTUS.
In short, he was an intelligent man with a long experience, and understanding of, military and diplomatic issues.

His son is (by contrast) nothing more than a know-nothing 'good ole boy' who is easily led by his grasping puppet-masters in the PNAC.

[SoxEd]

Sheesh, Ed. You could have spaced that out and practically doubled your post count.

:thumbsup:

Guilty as charged, m'lud....
:D

Who else thinks that my 'custom title' ought to read 'Pope of Prolixity', or perhaps 'Duke of Digression'?

[Prope]

1. Ed...:thumbsup:

2. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. This war in Iraq shows two things about our people in power; they are naive, and they are arrogant, and the two are not mutually exclusive.

I read a statistic that after the surrender of Germany in WW2, the US State Department and the War Department had already drawn up 5,000 different scenarios on how to handle Europe in the post-war world. Calling that generation the 'greatest generation' for simply winning the war does not paint the whole picture. Rather, they are the 'greatest generation' because they had the will and the know-how to keep fascism from reemerging in Europe.

Now we have the sons of the 'greatest generation.' Who is willing to bet that this current generation put in the time and the effort to put together scenarios of how the region would react to the Iraq War?

[StockdaleforVeep]

I disagree - I think it shows that Ahmedinajad is a gambler, and I think that he is correct in his assessment that we are not in a position to respond militarily.

I think that he is trying to convey our lack of invincibility to the rest of the Arab world, so that he can then push on to building an Iranian Nuclear Deterrent.
Which, however ghastly we think the Iranian Govt is, we can hardly blame them for when we look at our own long history of actions towards sovereign states that we happen to dislike.

It certainly shows that his Govt has no respect for the decencies of International Law - but then we are hardly in a position to kvetch about that, are we?



What 'proof'?

The 'word' of Anthony Bliar?

Only the sailors of the two navies could know for certain where the capture took place, and neither group could hardly be considered 'impartial' in this matter.



We do not have the resources to attack Iran.
The regimes of Thatcher, Major and Bliar has successively downgraded our Military until we have reached the point where we are at now - which is to say that we can ONLY operate as an adjunct to American forces.

Bliar's last Defence 'Review' even admitted this fact explicitly!

If a fascist Argentinian Dictator invaded the Falklands now, then we'd just have to wave the islands goodbye, along with the rights of the British families who live on them.

Bliar should IMO be tried for the traitor that he is.



There's nothing that the EU can do about this:
for one thing the EU has no 'Armed Forces' at its disposal;

for another, Ahmedinajad is not going to listen to 'diplomacy' on this - unless we accept that he has the right to Nuclear Weapons of his own, and that isn't going to happen anytime soon;

for a third, I bet the French are having too good of a time laughing their arses off at us to do anything to resolve the situation.

Ahmedinajad has us by the short-and-curlies, and he knows it.
:(

EDIT: This situation is just another example of the 'blowback' resulting from the invasion of Iraq.

George HW Bush did NOT invade Iraq when he had the chance - but then he was a man who had not only served in WW2, but who had also run the CIA, and who had already been Veep for eight years by the time he became POTUS.
In short, he was an intelligent man with a long experience, and understanding of, military and diplomatic issues.

His son is (by contrast) nothing more than a know-nothing 'good ole boy' who is easily led by his grasping puppet-masters in the PNAC.

The EU has forces in Germany, Poland and France. But even with this "union" they are not unified together. If anything, this should be a global condemnation of these acts but its not. You can bet your ass if it happened to be the US doing something like this, you'd have all the nations outcry

[StockdaleforVeep]

1. Ed...:thumbsup:

2. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. This war in Iraq shows two things about our people in power; they are naive, and they are arrogant, and the two are not mutually exclusive.

I read a statistic that after the surrender of Germany in WW2, the US State Department and the War Department had already drawn up 5,000 different scenarios on how to handle Europe in the post-war world. Calling that generation the 'greatest generation' for simply winning the war does not paint the whole picture. Rather, they are the 'greatest generation' because they had the will and the know-how to keep fascism from reemerging in Europe.

Now we have the sons of the 'greatest generation.' Who is willing to bet that this current generation put in the time and the effort to put together scenarios of how the region would react to the Iraq War?

The greatest generation gave birth to the pussy generation

[Prope]

The greatest generation gave birth to the pussy generation
Something we can both agree upon.

[StockdaleforVeep]

Something we can both agree upon.

and IMO, most of the lot are liberals

[Myrtle]

Something we can both agree upon.

Obviously, for completely different reasons... :rolleyes:

Stockdale, the ones who are "pussies" are the ones who are afraid of change and can't handle a little bit of freedom in the privacy of the home.

[fquaye14ten]

the only pussies are the things between myrtles legs


there's no such thing as a pussy. everyone just has their own way of doing things

i guess what i'm trying to say is: everyone is different

[Myrtle]

I only have one pussy. :omg:

[fquaye14ten]

*disappointed*

[Myrtle]

Well, otherswise, I agree with you.

[1951Campbell]

Wh:omg: d:omg:es?

Elfskin does.

[CaptainBallz]

and IMO, most of the lot are liberals

Your opinion is that of a buttmunch.

[Prope]

and IMO, most of the lot are liberals
Sen. Jim Webb
Rep. Tim Walz, D-MN
Rep. Jim Sestak, D-PA
Rep. Chris Carney, D-PA
Rep. Patrick Murphey, D-PA
Rep. Phil Hare, D-IL
Rep. Jack Murtha, D-PA
Former House Minority Leader Gephardt
Rep. David Bonoir
Former Senate Minority Leader Daschle
Al Gore
Former Senator Bob Kerrey
Senator Daniel Inouye
Senator John Kerry
Rep. Charles Rangel
Former Senator Max Cleland
Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-MA
Sen. Tom Harkin, D-IA
Sen. Jack Reed, D-RI
Former Senator Fritz Hollings, D-SC
Rep. Leonard Boswell, D-IA
Rep. Mike Thompson, D-CA
Former CA Governor Gray Davis
Pete Stark, D-CA
Wesley Clark
There is your listing of liberal pussies who served in the United States Armed Forces.

[Prope]

and IMO, most of the lot are liberals
Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-KY
Sen. Trent Lott, R-MS
Jon Kyl, R-AZ
National Republican Senatorial Committee Chair John Ensign, R-NV
Rep. John Boehner, R-OH
Rep. Roy Blunt, R-MO
Rep. Adam Putnam, R-FL
Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, R-MI
Rep. Tom Cole, R-OK
Rudy Guiliani
Governor Mitt Romney
Rep. Dennis Hastert, R-IL
Rep. Dick Armey, R-TX
Indicted Former Rep. Tom Delay, R-TX
Sen. Bill Frist, R-TN
Sen. Rick Santorum, R-PA
Former Senator George Allen
Vice President Dick Cheney
Former Attorney General John Ashcroft
Gov. Jeb Bush, R-FL
Karl Rove
Newt Gingrich
Ronald Reagan, R-Dead (Though Ronnie made some military movies, I s'pose that might count)
Phil Graham
Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-GA
Paul Wolfowitz
Richard Perle
All of these prominent Republicans had other things going on, and did not see fit to serve their country. Here are a few of my favorites though; Rush, O'Reilly, Hannity, and Savage - all DID NOT serve.

[CaptainBallz]

Sen. Jim Webb
...
Wesley Clark
There is your listing of liberal, traitorous, freedom-hating, cutting and running pussies who served in the United States Armed Forces.

Fixed it for you...:D

Meanwhile here is a list of freedom-loving tough guys who AVOIDED military service at all costs...

Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld

GW Bush - decided that a six-year Nat'l Guard commitment really means four years. Still says that he's "been to war."

VP Cheney - several deferments, the last by marriage (in his own words, "had other priorities than military service")

Jeb Bush, Florida Governor - did not serve.

Karl Rove - avoided the draft, did not serve, too busy being a Republican.

Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.

Richard Perle: did not serve.

Douglas Feith: did not serve.

Eliot Abrams: did not serve.

Ari Fleischer: did not serve.

Andrew Card: did not serve.

Ken Adelman: did not serve.

Don Evans: did not serve.

Michael Ledeen: did not serve.

Elliott Abrams: did not serve.

John Bolton: did not serve.

Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.

George Pataki: did not serve.

Former Speaker Newt Gingrich - avoided the draft, did not serve

Former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert - avoided the draft, did not serve.

Supreme Court :
John G. Roberts, Jr.: did not serve.
Samuel Alito: did not serve.
Antonin Scalia: did not serve.
Clarence Thomas: did not serve.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-KY - did not serve

Senate Assistant Minority Leader Trent Lott, R-MI - avoided the draft, did not serve.

Senate Republican Conference Chairman Jon Kyl, R-AZ - did not serve.

National Republican Senatorial Committee Chair John Ensign, R-NV - did not serve.

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-OH - did not serve.

House Minority Whip Roy Blunt, R-MO - did not serve.

House Republican Conerence Chair Adam Putnam, R-FL - did not serve.

House Republican Policy Committee Thaddeus McCotter, R-MI - did not serve.

National Republican Congressional Committee Chair Tom Cole, R-OK - did not serve.

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney - did not serve in the military but did serve the Mormon Church on a 30-month mission to France.

Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey - avoided the draft, did not serve.

Former House Majority Leader Tom Delay - avoided the draft, did not serve (1). "So many minority youths had volunteered ... that there was literally no room for patriotic folks like himself."

Former House Majority Whip Roy Blunt - did not serve

Former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist - did not serve.

Rick Santorum, R-PA, formerly third ranking Republican in the Senate - did not serve.

George Felix Allen, former Republican Senator from Virginia - a supporter of Nixon and the Vietnam war, did not serve. (1)

Former Att'y Gen. John Ashcroft - did not serve ; received seven deferment to teach business ed at SW Missouri State

Former President Ronald Reagan - due to poor eyesight, served in a noncombat role making movies for the Army in southern California during WWII. He later seems to have confused his role as an actor playing a tail gunner with the real thing.

"B-1" Bob Dornan - avoided Korean War combat duty by enrolling in college acting classes Enlisted only after the fighting was over in Korea.

Phil Gramm - avoided the draft, did not serve, four student deferments

Kenneth Starr : sought deferment (for psoriasis).

Bill Bennett : sought graduate school deferment, (too smart to die).

Arnold Schwarzenegger: AWOL from Austrian army base.

Ted Olson, (Starr's assistand, and since Solictor General)

[CaptainBallz]

Damn.. beat me to it.... :D :thumbsup:

[Prope]

Damn.. beat me to it.... :D :thumbsup:
That's ok, btw I liked your fix.

You put in some that I did not, though I can see we both went to the same place for the information.

[CaptainBallz]

That's ok, btw I liked your fix.

You put in some that I did not, though I can see we both went to the same place for the information.


uhhh, that was all off the top of my head...totally :bolt:


Anyway, add 1 more:

StockdaleforVeep (even though he said he "tried")

[Prope]

Kind of like how I 'try' to stop smoking and go on a diet every month.

"I'm serious this time."

[fquaye14ten]

i am in the army







april fools

[StockdaleforVeep]

by liberal pussies, i was not referring to people in government

[Myrtle]

by liberal pussies, i was not referring to people in government

Then what were you referring to?

[LuvSox]

Make love, not war

*middle-index*

[StockdaleforVeep]

Then what were you referring to?

Hippies, limp wristed dems and republicans

I was making a broad generalization on who our parents are

[maurice]

8) the era of American global hegemony has been brought to an end

We've still got a little something called "total air superiority" going for us, which is nice.

I tell you what . . . if Jesus had "total air superiority," Easter would have turned out differently.

[fquaye14ten]

more peeps and cadbury creme eggs?

[SoxEd]

We've still got a little something called "total air superiority" going for us, which is nice.


Actually, I'd say that you have Air Supremacy - which is absolutely Outstanding in a stand-up war against conventional forces - but unfortunately it don't mean diddly in an 'asymmetric' conflict against guerilla forces - and particularly not in an urban environment.
:(

That has been proved time and again all over the world - from Vietnam, to Northern Ireland, to Palestine - and now it's being proved again in Iraq.
:(



I tell you what . . . if Jesus had "total air superiority," Easter would have turned out differently.

:D

[SoxEd]

...cadbury creme eggs?

Mmm... no natural ingredients... ...sacrilicious!