jbg Posted July 5, 2014 Report Posted July 5, 2014 If any adult men take that virgin-claptrap seriously it means they are seriously retarded.Unfortunately, there's still a very large number of people around the world, certainly including adult men, that take the promises or statements of their religions seriously.What else can you make of a culture that degrades women and gays, encourages some to live in splendor while the vast majority live in misery, and glorifies death? 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).
jbg Posted July 5, 2014 Report Posted July 5, 2014 I think that's the thing - bombing civilians directly wasn't consider a war crime during WW2 but is now. I think it's advance for peace for the world to reject the targeting of civilians.If we fought WW II in a matter that constitutes and "advance for peace" we'd all be speaking German. 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).
monty16 Posted July 5, 2014 Author Report Posted July 5, 2014 And what do you think constitutes matter shady? Quote
GostHacked Posted July 5, 2014 Report Posted July 5, 2014 If we fought WW II in a matter that constitutes and "advance for peace" we'd all be speaking German. Where is the peace today? Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted July 5, 2014 Report Posted July 5, 2014 Your opinion isn't supported by facts and history. I think you're purposely being silly. I somehow doubt it's purposely. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted July 5, 2014 Report Posted July 5, 2014 If we fought WW II in a matter that constitutes and "advance for peace" we'd all be speaking German. Specifics ? Sounds like you're saying Germany would have won the war I'd we didn't bomb German civilians. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
GostHacked Posted July 5, 2014 Report Posted July 5, 2014 Specifics ? Sounds like you're saying Germany would have won the war I'd we didn't bomb German civilians. The Allies did many bombing runs of cities. Dresden is the most notable one. The Allies firebombed Japan for some time before the two atomic bombs were dropped. Germany and Japan had taken part in the same activities against the allies. So in a war, civilians are an acceptable target. Rules of war? Geneva Convention? They mean nothing. Quote
eyeball Posted July 5, 2014 Report Posted July 5, 2014 If we fought WW II in a matter that constitutes and "advance for peace" we'd all be speaking German. And we'd probably still all be talking about the same old crap. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
monty16 Posted July 5, 2014 Author Report Posted July 5, 2014 The giveaway was when the US started embedding journalists and taking other measures to keep their atrocities under cover. And why? Why did the US military get to the point at which they were gleefully murdering Iraq's people when Iraq was completely guilt free of any connection with 9/11? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 5, 2014 Report Posted July 5, 2014 ...And why? Why did the US military get to the point at which they were gleefully murdering Iraq's people when Iraq was completely guilt free of any connection with 9/11? Because Saddam screwed up years before 9/11 and had to go bye-bye. "Even" Canada bombed him. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
monty16 Posted July 5, 2014 Author Report Posted July 5, 2014 You can't rewrite history b_c. If Saddam screwed up it was with US assistance. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 5, 2014 Report Posted July 5, 2014 You can't rewrite history b_c. If Saddam screwed up it was with US assistance. I don't have to rewrite history. Saddam had to go as a matter of U.S. Public Law, in 1998. By any means necessary...it worked...Saddam is in "heaven". Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
GostHacked Posted July 5, 2014 Report Posted July 5, 2014 I hope another country makes it their public policy to oust the POTUS. Fair is fair. Quote
Argus Posted July 5, 2014 Report Posted July 5, 2014 (edited) That had sometimes been referred to as "collateral damage" except that term denotes that the damage is unintentional or accidental. Civilian casualties are now "expected" in these military expeditions and deemed "acceptable" by the perpetrators and "murders" by the recipients. A lot of the civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan were 'collateral' damage from Muslim terrorists, but nobody seems to be unduly upset at that. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1231618/posts?page=52 Edited July 5, 2014 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted July 5, 2014 Report Posted July 5, 2014 The giveaway was when the US started embedding journalists and taking other measures to keep their atrocities under cover. And why? Why did the US military get to the point at which they were gleefully murdering Iraq's people when Iraq was completely guilt free of any connection with 9/11? That might be answerable if your entire proposition wasn't fantasy born of extremism and hate. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Shady Posted July 5, 2014 Report Posted July 5, 2014 I hope another country makes it their public policy to oust the POTUS. Fair is fair. Many have made it private. Making it public is at least being honest and upfront. Quote
GostHacked Posted July 5, 2014 Report Posted July 5, 2014 Many have made it private. Making it public is at least being honest and upfront. Up front and honest? Where are those WMDs? Quote
Shady Posted July 5, 2014 Report Posted July 5, 2014 Up front and honest? Where are those WMDs? Good question. Why did Saddam pretend to have them? Why did he break the ceasefire agreement he signed? Why did he violate multiple UN resolutions? You know, if he didn't do all of that stuff, your buddy would still be in power. And he'd be able to continue his relationship with your other buddy in Russia. Quote
GostHacked Posted July 6, 2014 Report Posted July 6, 2014 Good question. Why did Saddam pretend to have them? Why would he pretend to have them? Remember all the stuff Powell trotted out based on the evidence (that we now know was completely false to begin with) that 'Curveball' had given the US? Why did he break the ceasefire agreement he signed? Why did he violate multiple UN resolutions? You know, if he didn't do all of that stuff, your buddy would still be in power. And he'd be able to continue his relationship with your other buddy in Russia. They are not my buddy, guy. But for all those that would be ok. However the US did not portray the need to invade from those reasons stated above. Instead we got reasons like loosely tied to 9/11, rhetoric about a mushroom cloud (aka fear mongering) and, because they are Muslims. We all know Iraq was in no position to threaten anyone after the first Gulf War. Quote
monty16 Posted July 6, 2014 Author Report Posted July 6, 2014 And gosthacked, you also need to make it clear to the Americans that we know they didn't believe that Saddam had the WMD's all along. Some people excuse their Nazi tactics by claiming they didn't know and couldn't take a chance. But then, if you continue to sympathize with the Zionists, there's little point in tryinig to convince you of anything. Sure wish you would get over your stubbornness and clare that one up! Quote
Argus Posted July 6, 2014 Report Posted July 6, 2014 (edited) And gosthacked, you also need to make it clear to the Americans that we know they didn't believe that Saddam had the WMD's all along. Some people excuse their Nazi tactics by claiming they didn't know and couldn't take a chance. Iraq had poison chemicals (and used themon people), which the US considers to be a weapon of mass destruction. Edited July 6, 2014 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Michael Hardner Posted July 6, 2014 Report Posted July 6, 2014 Rules of war? Geneva Convention? They mean nothing. I don't think that is true as per my previous posts. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
monty16 Posted July 6, 2014 Author Report Posted July 6, 2014 The US stockpiles and supplies other countries with the biggest and most evil weapons of mass destruction known to man. While at the same time pretending that weapons that are not frequently used in their arsenal of death and destruction become WMD's. These are invariably weapons that are of little use to the US because of their lack of effectiveness and lack of ability to kill hundreds or sometimes thousands of victims in one attack. In truth, a weapon of mass destruction is a weapon that is capable of causing mass destruction. It doesn't get anymore straight forward than that. And so, by an extension of logic, the US is the country that is most guilty of the use of weapons of mass destruction. And that by logical extension of the argument, leads us back to the reason why ISIS is intent in forming an Islamic state in the ME. Islam will attempt to consolidate itself in order to fight back against US aggression. with......................... their own weapons of mass destruction. Only complete fools would continue to align ourselves with the US and the only fools are those who let Harper align Canada with US evil which motivates entities such as ISIS.. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 6, 2014 Report Posted July 6, 2014 ....Only complete fools would continue to align ourselves with the US and the only fools are those who let Harper align Canada with US evil which motivates entities such as ISIS.. Are you calling Canadian voters "complete fools" ? How about the millions of Canadians who will cross the U.S. border for shopping and a winter paradise ? Or pipelines...or bridges....or media....or lettuce from California ! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Argus Posted July 6, 2014 Report Posted July 6, 2014 The US stockpiles and supplies other countries with the biggest and most evil weapons of mass destruction known to man. Cite? Evidence? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
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.