jbg Posted February 1, 2010 Author Report Posted February 1, 2010 First, Obama does not have a "leftwing approach." He's basicaly a Clintonesque triangulator.Massive phumphering does not equal skillful triangulation. Basically Clinton was culturally anathema to the Republicans but his policies were center-left. Thus he had many areas of agreement with the Republicans. Despite making necessary bi-partisan noises Obama has little or nothing in common with the Republicans or for that matter many Democrats. You do realize the people retaliating against the west feel precisely the same for the very same reasons don't you? It isn't the same at all. Many Muslims live peacefully and safely in the West. We do not attach Muslim lands because of the presence of Muslim individuals or companies; the excuse for 911 was the presence of Westerners in the "ummah". Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Michael Hardner Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 All the successes are one time events. That's the problem. As the saying goes, we have to succeed every single time. They only have to succeed once. And with all the radical fanatics - and their numbers continue to grow - there's no shortage of wack jobs willing to sacrifice themselves for Allah. Really ? Their numbers are growing ? I have no idea if that's true or untrue, but I seem to remember Bush saying that he had them on the run at some point. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
jbg Posted February 1, 2010 Author Report Posted February 1, 2010 The underwear bomber almost succeeded. The train bomber(s) in Spain succeeded. The subway bombers in London succeeded. The Bali nightclub bombers succeeded. They're batting pretty well, eh? What do we expect, you can't go starting wars in other countries without pissing people off. If they lose their family of friends in that war, they are going to be pissed and eventually someone will want take revenge. Terrorists are just people like you or me. Stop listening to the propaganda filled news. We are using missiles and tanks to kill them, is that any more humane then strapping dynamite to your chest and killing people. War is Terrorism. This whole war on terrorism is insane, there is no logic behind it. No, the terrorists are not people. They're beasts. Just as much as people who torture animals or children are correctly labeled as beasts. The terrorists cannot be deemed our equivalents. Let's get a few things clear. When the West goes to war it targets military targets, by and large. Sometimes the "fighters", read "cowards" on the other side hide among civilians or dress up in civilian clothes. In all of the examples I cited above the terrorists' targets were innocent mass transit users, airplane passengers or civilians in buildings. Those attacks were not even colorably aimed at a civilian target. It is time to drop the Grade 8 Social Studies approach to moral responsibility, where the teacher pretends that everyone and every value system is equal. The practitioners of other value systems have no use for your life. We at least value their lives as long as they leave us alone. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
DogOnPorch Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 Really ? Their numbers are growing ? I have no idea if that's true or untrue, but I seem to remember Bush saying that he had them on the run at some point. Well to be fair, most of the anti-American Military Industrial Complex types around here claim a new jihadi freedom fighter is created everytime a Marine opens a MRE on 'Muslim soil'. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Michael Hardner Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 The underwear bomber almost succeeded. The train bomber(s) in Spain succeeded. The subway bombers in London succeeded. The Bali nightclub bombers succeeded. They're batting pretty well, eh? It's pretty hard to guard against these events in public places. Keep in mind that I'm not saying that they are not a threat. The assertion was made at the top of this thread that they have been reduced in effectiveness due to military efforts in the middle east, and I responded to that. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Michael Hardner Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 It is time to drop the Grade 8 Social Studies approach to moral responsibility, where the teacher pretends that everyone and every value system is equal. The practitioners of other value systems have no use for your life. We at least value their lives as long as they leave us alone. This is the problem I have with that kind of sentiment: it seems to be more about your dislike of the 'tolerance' ethic than a solid basis for making moral decisions. Lots of other value systems value life and lots don't value it. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
eyeball Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 (edited) No, the terrorists are not people. They're beasts. Just as much as people who torture animals or children are correctly labeled as beasts. The terrorists cannot be deemed our equivalents. People from democracies that prop up dictatorships are far worse than terrorists, because we should know better. Let's get a few things clear. When the West goes to war it targets military targets, by and large. Sometimes the "fighters", read "cowards" on the other side hide among civilians or dress up in civilian clothes. Sometimes when we go start wars we do so by targeting people's democratic aspirations. In all of the examples I cited above the terrorists' targets were innocent mass transit users, airplane passengers or civilians in buildings. Those attacks were not even colorably aimed at a civilian target. The west's attack against Iran in 1953 for example was clearly aimed at a civilian target. We didn't even have the common decency to used uniformed soldiers. It is time to drop the Grade 8 Social Studies approach to moral responsibility, where the teacher pretends that everyone and every value system is equal. The practitioners of other value systems have no use for your life. We at least value their lives as long as they leave us alone. It is clear we value no such thing when we prop up dictators. Edited February 1, 2010 by eyeball Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
DogOnPorch Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 The west's attack against Iran in 1953 for example was clearly aimed at a civilian target. We didn't even have the common decency to used uniformed soldiers. They were very much uniformed soldiers. Iranians at that. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 They were very much uniformed soldiers. Iranians at that. I meant the 'soldiers' that we used. They acted more like you'd expect some filthy sneaky terrorist to behave, but worse because they knew better or should have. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Wilber Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 (edited) All the successes are one time events. That's the problem. As the saying goes, we have to succeed every single time. They only have to succeed once. And with all the radical fanatics - and their numbers continue to grow - there's no shortage of wack jobs willing to sacrifice themselves for Allah. No, we don't have to succeed every time. No one succeeds every time in a war. Doesn't mean you still don't have to fight it. Unless you are happy with radical fanatics inheriting the earth. Edited February 1, 2010 by Wilber Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
M.Dancer Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 I meant the 'soldiers' that we used. They acted more like you'd expect some filthy sneaky terrorist to behave, but worse because they knew better or should have. You mean the Iranian soldiers? Loyal to their king, upholding their constitution? So what? Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
eyeball Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 You mean the Iranian soldiers? Loyal to their king, upholding their constitution? So what? Go figure it out yourself. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
DogOnPorch Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 (edited) I meant the 'soldiers' that we used. They acted more like you'd expect some filthy sneaky terrorist to behave, but worse because they knew better or should have. What un-uniformed soldiers were involved? Branch of service...unit? Hate to burst your bubble, but the US didn't actually have to do that much except say go for it plus provide logistical support...ie: aircraft for flying yon Shah around. But I know how much you like the cloke n' dagger version with US agents in dark glasses and suits doing it all. Edited February 1, 2010 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 What un-uniformed soldiers were involved? Branch of service...unit? Hate to burst your bubble, but the US didn't actually have to do that much except say go for it plus provide logistical support...ie: aircraft for flying yon Shah around. But I know how much you like the cloke n' dagger version with US agents in dark glasses and suits doing it all. It only takes a few bad apples to do in the whole barrel. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
DogOnPorch Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 It only takes a few bad apples to do in the whole barrel. Who did the coup again? Try after me.... I-ran-ians Sound it out. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 Who did the coup again? Try after me.... C I A Sound it out. That's right, C I A, what's so hard about that? Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Wilber Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 That's right, C I A, what's so hard about that? Got to be a rule about changing someone else's quote, don't you think? Not cool. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
eyeball Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 Got to be a rule about changing someone else's quote, don't you think? Not cool. As uncool as changing history? Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Wilber Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 As uncool as changing history? I think you should reconsider and delete it. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
eyeball Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 I think you should reconsider and delete it. Bite me. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
DogOnPorch Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 (edited) Bite me. eyeball just has problems when reality overruns his fantasy. Nothing short of Big Ike himself doing the 'dirty deed' is acceptable. Now if he can just photoshop him into the picture where Iranians are leading Mossadegh away he'd have some proof. Edited February 1, 2010 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted February 2, 2010 Report Posted February 2, 2010 I hate it when eyeball is right. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
DogOnPorch Posted February 2, 2010 Report Posted February 2, 2010 You're not fooling anyone. Fact is the main US involvement in the coup involved being taxi drivers for the Shah. Mundane...but vital. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted February 2, 2010 Report Posted February 2, 2010 You're not fooling anyone. Who said I was, Obama or Albright? Fact is the main US involvement in the coup involved being taxi drivers for the Shah. Mundane...but vital. Yep, the U.S. was little more than Britain's biatch. Vital...but even more pathetically mundane. George Washington would puke. Biatch...a "gangster" substitue for bitch...A person who performs tasks for another, usually degrading in status. Ain't that the truth? Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Wilber Posted February 2, 2010 Report Posted February 2, 2010 Bite me. So you think it is acceptable to alter other people's posts? Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.