Scum
-
Scum[^] I could have said "subhumans" but many find that offensive. Mike "liberals are being driven crazy by the fact that Bush is so popular with Americans, and thus by the realization that anyone to the left of center is utterly marginal." JAMES TRAUB NY Times Loyal member of the vast right wing conspiracy Me "Kerry is a girl's name." Conan O'Brian "I've spoken to many world leaders - they all look at me and say, you've got to win. I just can't tell you who they are." J.F.Kerry
Sounds like something you might see on the evening news. They are all-too-human if you ask me.
"Live long and prosper." - Spock
Jason Henderson
blog -
Scum[^] I could have said "subhumans" but many find that offensive. Mike "liberals are being driven crazy by the fact that Bush is so popular with Americans, and thus by the realization that anyone to the left of center is utterly marginal." JAMES TRAUB NY Times Loyal member of the vast right wing conspiracy Me "Kerry is a girl's name." Conan O'Brian "I've spoken to many world leaders - they all look at me and say, you've got to win. I just can't tell you who they are." J.F.Kerry
It amazes me that there are still people who want to just click their heels together three times and wish themselves into a world that can ignore those bastards. "Yo DUDE!!!!!!! Like if it weren't for our TOTAL dependence on foreign oil then we could like blow off that whole downer middle-east place man! Peace brother!" These idiots don't seem to realize that the world is where it is and prefer to live in a fantasy world where all of the terrorism would go away and the radical mulim freaks would love America if everyone traded in their car for a Vespa or a Segway. They sit their with the technology that wouldn't be possible without oil, 99% of them drive oil burning cars. They all use plastics and other petroleum based products. If they were anything other than clueless hypocrites they would move to the Australian outback, start a commune with lots of sandals and hairy women and plant soybeans and talk about how groovy everything was. THen you have the "Like you Americans are too aggressive eh. Why don't you mellow out, eh? You don't see us being attacked by Al Queda, eh?" Brainiacs. They fail to realize that without the USA, radical muslim freaks would be over running many countries. Why do they target the USA? Because why bother targetting a mouse? No publicity there. And finally the supreme idiots - the "Bring our troops home now" dumbfucks. Do these asswipes actually believe that if the USA came home we would be SAFER?!?!?! That if the US left the region all of the muslim extremist freaks would just settle down and go back to playing tiddly-winks and holding Koran quote trivia contests? THis is so wrong that I have no respect for the people that say this. What would happen would be all of the governments in the middle east would turn into fundamentalist Christian,,, I mean Taliban countries. And in those countries terrorist training camps would spring up and we would be attacked continously. Anyone who doesn't want to fight back and kill a thousand of them for every one of us killed is the friend of my enemy.
//placeholder for witty verbiage
-
Hey the Saudi's and Iran have both spent years supporting terrorism. Lets give them 72 hours to hand over the leaders of Hamas, Hezzbollah, and Al Quada. If they don't we retaliate and turn ther countries into parking lots. Its pretty obvious they aren't with us, so obviously they are against us. At the same time we should give Russia the nod in how they are to deal with the Chechen rebels. Short of killing these guys there really is no good way to deal with them. After Tehran and Riyhad are smoking holes the idea of assisting terrorists might not be so appealing. Uptight Ex-Military Republican married to a Commie Lib - How weird is that?
It's interesting you mention the saudi's. I saw a documentary the other night, where former and present CIA officers spoke about the unwritten law in the white house: You may not criticize the Saudi's, for they are our friends with lots of oil. According to the documentary, it started with George Sr, not stopping with Clinton, and still going strong with GWB. Clinton was even approached by the Sudanese government to hand over Usama bin Laden. Since the US did not have the needed evidence to apprehend Usama, the only logical choice was to turn him over to Saudi Arabia, where they could have done whatever they do at their courts. But Saudi Arabia was much too important to be bothered with such deals. You guys really need to examine your leaders, because obviously, oil is first priority, followed by the security of the people. You don't have to be a hard core communist to find that despicable. -- Ich bin Joachim von Hassel, und ich bin Pilot der Bundeswehr. Welle: Erdball - F104-G Starfighter
-
It's interesting you mention the saudi's. I saw a documentary the other night, where former and present CIA officers spoke about the unwritten law in the white house: You may not criticize the Saudi's, for they are our friends with lots of oil. According to the documentary, it started with George Sr, not stopping with Clinton, and still going strong with GWB. Clinton was even approached by the Sudanese government to hand over Usama bin Laden. Since the US did not have the needed evidence to apprehend Usama, the only logical choice was to turn him over to Saudi Arabia, where they could have done whatever they do at their courts. But Saudi Arabia was much too important to be bothered with such deals. You guys really need to examine your leaders, because obviously, oil is first priority, followed by the security of the people. You don't have to be a hard core communist to find that despicable. -- Ich bin Joachim von Hassel, und ich bin Pilot der Bundeswehr. Welle: Erdball - F104-G Starfighter
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: You guys really need to examine your leaders, because obviously, oil is first priority, followed by the security of the people. That seems to follow what I saw on a BBC report earlier today. Saudi Arabia holds 25% of the world's oil reserves. How would Americans driver their Hummers without all that oil?
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog
-
It amazes me that there are still people who want to just click their heels together three times and wish themselves into a world that can ignore those bastards. "Yo DUDE!!!!!!! Like if it weren't for our TOTAL dependence on foreign oil then we could like blow off that whole downer middle-east place man! Peace brother!" These idiots don't seem to realize that the world is where it is and prefer to live in a fantasy world where all of the terrorism would go away and the radical mulim freaks would love America if everyone traded in their car for a Vespa or a Segway. They sit their with the technology that wouldn't be possible without oil, 99% of them drive oil burning cars. They all use plastics and other petroleum based products. If they were anything other than clueless hypocrites they would move to the Australian outback, start a commune with lots of sandals and hairy women and plant soybeans and talk about how groovy everything was. THen you have the "Like you Americans are too aggressive eh. Why don't you mellow out, eh? You don't see us being attacked by Al Queda, eh?" Brainiacs. They fail to realize that without the USA, radical muslim freaks would be over running many countries. Why do they target the USA? Because why bother targetting a mouse? No publicity there. And finally the supreme idiots - the "Bring our troops home now" dumbfucks. Do these asswipes actually believe that if the USA came home we would be SAFER?!?!?! That if the US left the region all of the muslim extremist freaks would just settle down and go back to playing tiddly-winks and holding Koran quote trivia contests? THis is so wrong that I have no respect for the people that say this. What would happen would be all of the governments in the middle east would turn into fundamentalist Christian,,, I mean Taliban countries. And in those countries terrorist training camps would spring up and we would be attacked continously. Anyone who doesn't want to fight back and kill a thousand of them for every one of us killed is the friend of my enemy.
//placeholder for witty verbiage
Terry O`Nolley wrote: Anyone who doesn't want to fight back and kill a thousand of them for every one of us killed is the friend of my enemy. Good rant and I couldn't agree more. While I am a huge admirer of Reagan the opportunity to stop this was dodged on his watch. It was also ignored on Bush #1's watch and on Clinton's as well. With luck stopping it has started on Bush 2's watch. Mike "liberals are being driven crazy by the fact that Bush is so popular with Americans, and thus by the realization that anyone to the left of center is utterly marginal." JAMES TRAUB NY Times Loyal member of the vast right wing conspiracy Me "Kerry is a girl's name." Conan O'Brian "I've spoken to many world leaders - they all look at me and say, you've got to win. I just can't tell you who they are." J.F.Kerry
-
It amazes me that there are still people who want to just click their heels together three times and wish themselves into a world that can ignore those bastards. "Yo DUDE!!!!!!! Like if it weren't for our TOTAL dependence on foreign oil then we could like blow off that whole downer middle-east place man! Peace brother!" These idiots don't seem to realize that the world is where it is and prefer to live in a fantasy world where all of the terrorism would go away and the radical mulim freaks would love America if everyone traded in their car for a Vespa or a Segway. They sit their with the technology that wouldn't be possible without oil, 99% of them drive oil burning cars. They all use plastics and other petroleum based products. If they were anything other than clueless hypocrites they would move to the Australian outback, start a commune with lots of sandals and hairy women and plant soybeans and talk about how groovy everything was. THen you have the "Like you Americans are too aggressive eh. Why don't you mellow out, eh? You don't see us being attacked by Al Queda, eh?" Brainiacs. They fail to realize that without the USA, radical muslim freaks would be over running many countries. Why do they target the USA? Because why bother targetting a mouse? No publicity there. And finally the supreme idiots - the "Bring our troops home now" dumbfucks. Do these asswipes actually believe that if the USA came home we would be SAFER?!?!?! That if the US left the region all of the muslim extremist freaks would just settle down and go back to playing tiddly-winks and holding Koran quote trivia contests? THis is so wrong that I have no respect for the people that say this. What would happen would be all of the governments in the middle east would turn into fundamentalist Christian,,, I mean Taliban countries. And in those countries terrorist training camps would spring up and we would be attacked continously. Anyone who doesn't want to fight back and kill a thousand of them for every one of us killed is the friend of my enemy.
//placeholder for witty verbiage
Then this and the previous two administrations who let the saudis finance terrorist acts, including 9/11, can't be friends of yours... -- Ich bin Joachim von Hassel, und ich bin Pilot der Bundeswehr. Welle: Erdball - F104-G Starfighter
-
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: You guys really need to examine your leaders, because obviously, oil is first priority, followed by the security of the people. That seems to follow what I saw on a BBC report earlier today. Saudi Arabia holds 25% of the world's oil reserves. How would Americans driver their Hummers without all that oil?
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog
Therein lies the deception. It's not like these powerful men are making deals for the benefit of Hummer drivers. Maybe I'm getting more paranoid with age, but I when I see people in power, I get the feeling that they're just there to ensure their own future, and not of the ones who elected them. Sometimes I wonder what is ethically more correct: Being screwed by someone who tells you in the face "I am screwing you" (the typical dictator), or being screwed by the one who promised you everything, but took most of it themselves. And oh yeah.. I wonder how many in the US government owns shares in biometric device companies.. :) -- Ich bin Joachim von Hassel, und ich bin Pilot der Bundeswehr. Welle: Erdball - F104-G Starfighter
-
It amazes me that there are still people who want to just click their heels together three times and wish themselves into a world that can ignore those bastards. "Yo DUDE!!!!!!! Like if it weren't for our TOTAL dependence on foreign oil then we could like blow off that whole downer middle-east place man! Peace brother!" These idiots don't seem to realize that the world is where it is and prefer to live in a fantasy world where all of the terrorism would go away and the radical mulim freaks would love America if everyone traded in their car for a Vespa or a Segway. They sit their with the technology that wouldn't be possible without oil, 99% of them drive oil burning cars. They all use plastics and other petroleum based products. If they were anything other than clueless hypocrites they would move to the Australian outback, start a commune with lots of sandals and hairy women and plant soybeans and talk about how groovy everything was. THen you have the "Like you Americans are too aggressive eh. Why don't you mellow out, eh? You don't see us being attacked by Al Queda, eh?" Brainiacs. They fail to realize that without the USA, radical muslim freaks would be over running many countries. Why do they target the USA? Because why bother targetting a mouse? No publicity there. And finally the supreme idiots - the "Bring our troops home now" dumbfucks. Do these asswipes actually believe that if the USA came home we would be SAFER?!?!?! That if the US left the region all of the muslim extremist freaks would just settle down and go back to playing tiddly-winks and holding Koran quote trivia contests? THis is so wrong that I have no respect for the people that say this. What would happen would be all of the governments in the middle east would turn into fundamentalist Christian,,, I mean Taliban countries. And in those countries terrorist training camps would spring up and we would be attacked continously. Anyone who doesn't want to fight back and kill a thousand of them for every one of us killed is the friend of my enemy.
//placeholder for witty verbiage
"And finally the supreme idiots - the "Bring our troops home now" dumbf***s. Do these asswipes actually believe that if the USA came home we would be SAFER?!?!?! That if the US left the region all of the muslim extremist freaks would just settle down and go back to playing tiddly-winks and holding Koran quote trivia contests? THis is so wrong that I have no respect for the people that say this." You have a singular lack of ability to respect other people, then. It is a truism that the political anger of the average person is directly related to what immediately affects them in their daily lives. When the average Arab no longer sees the United States ham-handededly messing with their political system, then the United States will begin to fade in their minds. That has happened in the past. It will happen in the future. But then, that would go against your premise, which is that (a) You are angry, right, and ready for revenge, and (b) Those who oppose you are wrong and (c) Your enemies (a broad term encompassing even those who disagree with your political opinions) are implacable, evil, and wholly non-human. In your bloodthirsty cry for revenge, in which a thousand of "them" die for every one of "us" (regardless of any legal due process), I wonder if, were a Muslim country to succesfully occupy America, that you would be the one self-righteously beheading one of the occupiers in revenge for the wrongs they have rained on your head. When I read about the death of Mr. Johnson, I felt inexpressible sadness. But I did not for one moment imagine that the grief suffered by his family was any less than the grief suffered by ANY family of someone who has died. The calls for revenge on this board and elsewhere are perpetuations of the same kind of violent idiocy that leads to these kinds of killings. Do not forget that Johnson's killing was in revenge for other killings, and that those killings were in revenge for other killings. It is satisfying to feel angry, and it is satisfying to call for revenge, but it is not right. Your closing statement, that "Anyone who doesn't want to fight back and kill a thousand of them for every one of us killed is the friend of the enemy" shows that your morals are pretty much on the same level as those exhibited by Johnson's killers. Why? Look at it this way. Johnson was killed because he was (a) a Westerner and (b) a technician for Apache attack helicopters. Both of those meant that he was, to the members of al Quaeda, a "friend of the enemy". Innocent pe
-
Therein lies the deception. It's not like these powerful men are making deals for the benefit of Hummer drivers. Maybe I'm getting more paranoid with age, but I when I see people in power, I get the feeling that they're just there to ensure their own future, and not of the ones who elected them. Sometimes I wonder what is ethically more correct: Being screwed by someone who tells you in the face "I am screwing you" (the typical dictator), or being screwed by the one who promised you everything, but took most of it themselves. And oh yeah.. I wonder how many in the US government owns shares in biometric device companies.. :) -- Ich bin Joachim von Hassel, und ich bin Pilot der Bundeswehr. Welle: Erdball - F104-G Starfighter
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Maybe I'm getting more paranoid with age, but I when I see people in power, I get the feeling that they're just there to ensure their own future I get that feeling too. But they have to answer to the electorate so that tempers any great abuses. However, if the electorate get apathetic then that balance is lost. In the European elections last week the "You Chicken" party* won several seats. This threatens the UKs involvement in the EU as "You Chicken" want the UK to withdraw fully. The remaining politians realise that the main European issue at the moment is the constitution and people are unhappy with it. (I'm pro-EU and I'm unhappy with the proposed constitution, but I'm in support of their being one) So, the remaining political parties will want to retain power (and they've got to like power in Brussels) so they will, I hope, make the proper adjustments so that at the next election "You Chicken" go back into the hole the climbed out of. * I call the UK Independence Party (UKIP) "You Chicken" because in Dutch U == You and KIP == Chicken.
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog
-
"And finally the supreme idiots - the "Bring our troops home now" dumbf***s. Do these asswipes actually believe that if the USA came home we would be SAFER?!?!?! That if the US left the region all of the muslim extremist freaks would just settle down and go back to playing tiddly-winks and holding Koran quote trivia contests? THis is so wrong that I have no respect for the people that say this." You have a singular lack of ability to respect other people, then. It is a truism that the political anger of the average person is directly related to what immediately affects them in their daily lives. When the average Arab no longer sees the United States ham-handededly messing with their political system, then the United States will begin to fade in their minds. That has happened in the past. It will happen in the future. But then, that would go against your premise, which is that (a) You are angry, right, and ready for revenge, and (b) Those who oppose you are wrong and (c) Your enemies (a broad term encompassing even those who disagree with your political opinions) are implacable, evil, and wholly non-human. In your bloodthirsty cry for revenge, in which a thousand of "them" die for every one of "us" (regardless of any legal due process), I wonder if, were a Muslim country to succesfully occupy America, that you would be the one self-righteously beheading one of the occupiers in revenge for the wrongs they have rained on your head. When I read about the death of Mr. Johnson, I felt inexpressible sadness. But I did not for one moment imagine that the grief suffered by his family was any less than the grief suffered by ANY family of someone who has died. The calls for revenge on this board and elsewhere are perpetuations of the same kind of violent idiocy that leads to these kinds of killings. Do not forget that Johnson's killing was in revenge for other killings, and that those killings were in revenge for other killings. It is satisfying to feel angry, and it is satisfying to call for revenge, but it is not right. Your closing statement, that "Anyone who doesn't want to fight back and kill a thousand of them for every one of us killed is the friend of the enemy" shows that your morals are pretty much on the same level as those exhibited by Johnson's killers. Why? Look at it this way. Johnson was killed because he was (a) a Westerner and (b) a technician for Apache attack helicopters. Both of those meant that he was, to the members of al Quaeda, a "friend of the enemy". Innocent pe
Mike "liberals are being driven crazy by the fact that Bush is so popular with Americans, and thus by the realization that anyone to the left of center is utterly marginal." JAMES TRAUB NY Times Loyal member of the vast right wing conspiracy Me "Kerry is a girl's name." Conan O'Brian "I've spoken to many world leaders - they all look at me and say, you've got to win. I just can't tell you who they are." J.F.Kerry
-
It's interesting you mention the saudi's. I saw a documentary the other night, where former and present CIA officers spoke about the unwritten law in the white house: You may not criticize the Saudi's, for they are our friends with lots of oil. According to the documentary, it started with George Sr, not stopping with Clinton, and still going strong with GWB. Clinton was even approached by the Sudanese government to hand over Usama bin Laden. Since the US did not have the needed evidence to apprehend Usama, the only logical choice was to turn him over to Saudi Arabia, where they could have done whatever they do at their courts. But Saudi Arabia was much too important to be bothered with such deals. You guys really need to examine your leaders, because obviously, oil is first priority, followed by the security of the people. You don't have to be a hard core communist to find that despicable. -- Ich bin Joachim von Hassel, und ich bin Pilot der Bundeswehr. Welle: Erdball - F104-G Starfighter
Unfortunately you are right. If our leadership had half a brain we would be going full speed towards other sources of energy, including nuclear. Sadly the right and left sides of our political spectrum have to many of their own agendas. We haven't built a nuclear power plant for many many years, and our industries don't want to spend the money to retrofit coal burning equipment to operate cleanly. BTW, I'm far from a hard core communist. ;) The problem is that people have it so good that they have no reason to worry about issues outside of their own lives. I doubt that that is something Americans suffer from alone, but it is sad when people are to short sighted to even try to change things like this. Uptight Ex-Military Republican married to a Commie Lib - How weird is that?
-
It's interesting you mention the saudi's. I saw a documentary the other night, where former and present CIA officers spoke about the unwritten law in the white house: You may not criticize the Saudi's, for they are our friends with lots of oil. According to the documentary, it started with George Sr, not stopping with Clinton, and still going strong with GWB. Clinton was even approached by the Sudanese government to hand over Usama bin Laden. Since the US did not have the needed evidence to apprehend Usama, the only logical choice was to turn him over to Saudi Arabia, where they could have done whatever they do at their courts. But Saudi Arabia was much too important to be bothered with such deals. You guys really need to examine your leaders, because obviously, oil is first priority, followed by the security of the people. You don't have to be a hard core communist to find that despicable. -- Ich bin Joachim von Hassel, und ich bin Pilot der Bundeswehr. Welle: Erdball - F104-G Starfighter
There was an article on US/Saudi relations in the Reader's Digest recently. I couldn't find the book, but I did find a copy of the article online: http://www.msoa.com/teachers/Mr_Y/Saudi%20Arabia/Saudi-page.htm This passage sums things up well: Just to make sure no one upsets this system, perhaps by meddling in Saudi affairs, Saudi Arabia keeps as much as a trillion dollars in U.S. banks. The Saudis hold another trillion or so in the U.S. stock market. This gives them remarkable leverage in Washington. T-r-i-l-l-i-o-n! Yikes.
-
Mike "liberals are being driven crazy by the fact that Bush is so popular with Americans, and thus by the realization that anyone to the left of center is utterly marginal." JAMES TRAUB NY Times Loyal member of the vast right wing conspiracy Me "Kerry is a girl's name." Conan O'Brian "I've spoken to many world leaders - they all look at me and say, you've got to win. I just can't tell you who they are." J.F.Kerry
I suppose you could say that (re-reading my post), though I am not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination. I am, certainly, an idiot, as much as I try not to be. Do you have something more substantive to say? Chris Same feller as Chris Q, couldn't find my login info this morning
-
I suppose you could say that (re-reading my post), though I am not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination. I am, certainly, an idiot, as much as I try not to be. Do you have something more substantive to say? Chris Same feller as Chris Q, couldn't find my login info this morning
Lemmsjid wrote: Do you have something more substantive to say? No. I think Terry did quite well. Well, guess I do after all. The essence of your reply was that if we'd just quit meddling all would be well. We tried that in WWII and didn't wake up until it was damn near too late. Not happening this time and some one groups desire to live like 7th century Arabs and be pissed because we're either involved in commerce in their country (at the request of their government) or that we support the State of Israel or what ever complaint they may have is just too damn bad. We're (the USA, anyway)at war, period. Just like we took on Germany after we were attacked by Japan, we're now taking on radical Muslims regardless of where we find them - and correectly so I might add. Mike "liberals are being driven crazy by the fact that Bush is so popular with Americans, and thus by the realization that anyone to the left of center is utterly marginal." JAMES TRAUB NY Times Loyal member of the vast right wing conspiracy Me "Kerry is a girl's name." Conan O'Brian "I've spoken to many world leaders - they all look at me and say, you've got to win. I just can't tell you who they are." J.F.Kerry
-
How far do you think we should go? If we gave them a list of people to hand over and a solid deadline would you be willing to say we bomb the hell out of 'em or nuke 'em? I'm really getting to the point that I think we need to do that. Uptight Ex-Military Republican married to a Commie Lib - How weird is that?
That is a growing problem I have with Bush. I'm fine with taking out Iraq, but we needed a much broader plan. Blockading all major Islamic ports, taking out airports and major road ways. Throughly isolating the major Islamic nations and demanding a hand over of all known terrorists. If they were not forthcoming than we should have drafted 10 million + Americans and swept the entire area from one end to the other with no more regard for 'human rights' than we gave to Hitler's Germans (Nazi or not). I continue to have little patience with the image of the "moderate" "peaceful" Muslim who is "justifiable angry" with the behavior of the west and of the US. The best of them are frigging assholes and the rest are cowards and murderers. We have to do what ever it takes to get it through their thick skulls that they are a failed, backward culture that has no place in the future of human civilization.
-
Then this and the previous two administrations who let the saudis finance terrorist acts, including 9/11, can't be friends of yours... -- Ich bin Joachim von Hassel, und ich bin Pilot der Bundeswehr. Welle: Erdball - F104-G Starfighter
Nice attempt at retrofitting. I was talking about the post 9/11 world.
//placeholder for witty verbiage
-
Lemmsjid wrote: Do you have something more substantive to say? No. I think Terry did quite well. Well, guess I do after all. The essence of your reply was that if we'd just quit meddling all would be well. We tried that in WWII and didn't wake up until it was damn near too late. Not happening this time and some one groups desire to live like 7th century Arabs and be pissed because we're either involved in commerce in their country (at the request of their government) or that we support the State of Israel or what ever complaint they may have is just too damn bad. We're (the USA, anyway)at war, period. Just like we took on Germany after we were attacked by Japan, we're now taking on radical Muslims regardless of where we find them - and correectly so I might add. Mike "liberals are being driven crazy by the fact that Bush is so popular with Americans, and thus by the realization that anyone to the left of center is utterly marginal." JAMES TRAUB NY Times Loyal member of the vast right wing conspiracy Me "Kerry is a girl's name." Conan O'Brian "I've spoken to many world leaders - they all look at me and say, you've got to win. I just can't tell you who they are." J.F.Kerry
Thank you for your reply, Mike, much appreciated. And I do see what you're saying. I just look at the details a different way. For example, your aside where you say, "at the request of their government" is quite telling, and I think you're skimming over that aspect of things too much. What you're saying there is that they are being hypocritical for rejecting business that was solicited by their own governments. Many (most?) Arabs don't see "their government" as truly theirs. It was the United States' policy to prop up authoritarian, pro-Western governments in order to ensure economic stability there. And this comes directly after the colonial era, when Arab governments were explicitly not theirs. It is not surprising that people are still angry about that. Imagine if there was a powerful Muslim country propping up an authoritarian United States government? Imagine if until the middle of this century the United States government was run by profit motivated Arab companies? I, for one, would be bloody well pissed off. Second, I agree that radical Islamic extremists are scary, but let's call a spade a spade. Saddam was not by any stretch of imagination a radical Islamic extremist, and neither, for that matter, is Osama Bin Laden. Both acted from purely political motivations--Saddam because, well, he wanted power and authority, and Osama Bin Laden because he was pissed off at what he thought was the takeover of his country's government by outsiders. That is the problem I see with a lot of what is going on: we are quite willing to tar the Arab world with the same brush ("Muslim extremists") but then we get all huffy when they do the same ("We're all like the sadistic American prison guards..."). The fact is that popular anger fades when its source becomes distant. Examples of both kinds of results: * England still "occupies" Northern Ireland. The terrorism continues. * England no longer occupies America. Fading, residual anger on the part of Americans. * Scotland is now an equal member of the United Kingdom. This is several hundred years after a series of sadistically bloody occupations on the part of the English. * The Union no longer occupies the South. Fading, but still sometimes potent, anger in the South, but nothing that will cause imminent open warefare or terrorism. Here are more examples of "eternal" hatreds and power dynamics that have faded into (near) obsolescence: * It was once thought inevitable that Christendom would someday conquer the Middle East and put non-Chr
-
"And finally the supreme idiots - the "Bring our troops home now" dumbf***s. Do these asswipes actually believe that if the USA came home we would be SAFER?!?!?! That if the US left the region all of the muslim extremist freaks would just settle down and go back to playing tiddly-winks and holding Koran quote trivia contests? THis is so wrong that I have no respect for the people that say this." You have a singular lack of ability to respect other people, then. It is a truism that the political anger of the average person is directly related to what immediately affects them in their daily lives. When the average Arab no longer sees the United States ham-handededly messing with their political system, then the United States will begin to fade in their minds. That has happened in the past. It will happen in the future. But then, that would go against your premise, which is that (a) You are angry, right, and ready for revenge, and (b) Those who oppose you are wrong and (c) Your enemies (a broad term encompassing even those who disagree with your political opinions) are implacable, evil, and wholly non-human. In your bloodthirsty cry for revenge, in which a thousand of "them" die for every one of "us" (regardless of any legal due process), I wonder if, were a Muslim country to succesfully occupy America, that you would be the one self-righteously beheading one of the occupiers in revenge for the wrongs they have rained on your head. When I read about the death of Mr. Johnson, I felt inexpressible sadness. But I did not for one moment imagine that the grief suffered by his family was any less than the grief suffered by ANY family of someone who has died. The calls for revenge on this board and elsewhere are perpetuations of the same kind of violent idiocy that leads to these kinds of killings. Do not forget that Johnson's killing was in revenge for other killings, and that those killings were in revenge for other killings. It is satisfying to feel angry, and it is satisfying to call for revenge, but it is not right. Your closing statement, that "Anyone who doesn't want to fight back and kill a thousand of them for every one of us killed is the friend of the enemy" shows that your morals are pretty much on the same level as those exhibited by Johnson's killers. Why? Look at it this way. Johnson was killed because he was (a) a Westerner and (b) a technician for Apache attack helicopters. Both of those meant that he was, to the members of al Quaeda, a "friend of the enemy". Innocent pe
Chris Q wrote: In your bloodthirsty cry for revenge, in which a thousand of "them" die for every one of "us" Nice try - but my definition of "them" has always been terrorists. If you don't advocate fighting back and killing terrorists then yeah - I consider you a friend of my enemy because you are advocating their exact position. Chris Q wrote: When the average Arab no longer sees the United States ham-handededly messing with their political system, then the United States will begin to fade in their minds I can't tell if you genuinely believe this, or if it is just the hip thing to say these days amongst the terrorist appeaser in-crowd. You use the term "ham-handed". This makes me think you may be rather intelligent since it leaves you the out of saying "I never said the US had to totally leave - just stop doing it ham-handedly!". But you weaken your overall position by using such sludgy techniques. Do you believe that if the USA advocates a reactionary isolationist policy the way the old republicans wanted that Islamic extremists would truly ignore the USA? What happens when they overthrow the Saudi government? WHat happens when the world's oil is in the hands of the Taliban? What happens when they realize that the USA is still cowering in its shell and its political process is being manipulated by whining pacifists whose very stance causes more people to be slaughtered than by fighting back against evil? Or do you believe terrrorists aren't evil? They just want to force the world into a yoke where women are stoned to death for kissing their boyfriends and men are beaten to death for singing songs. Those people won't stop until the entire world has been remade in their image or until they are wiped off the face of the earth. Dead. Their ashes scattered, their allies locked up, their homes raised and their children removed. I think the real issue is that you know that you will be dead long before that can happen so you would rather look hip and progressive by siding with the terrorists on the issue of whether or not the just nations should fight back. Either you don't believe there is a war going on or you truly believe it will all go away if we just crawl into a big hole and hope the maniacs will ignore us and slaughter other people instead. Chris Q wrote: Do not forget that Johnson's killing was in revenge for other killings, and that those killings were in revenge for other killings. So what? Don
-
Chris Q wrote: In your bloodthirsty cry for revenge, in which a thousand of "them" die for every one of "us" Nice try - but my definition of "them" has always been terrorists. If you don't advocate fighting back and killing terrorists then yeah - I consider you a friend of my enemy because you are advocating their exact position. Chris Q wrote: When the average Arab no longer sees the United States ham-handededly messing with their political system, then the United States will begin to fade in their minds I can't tell if you genuinely believe this, or if it is just the hip thing to say these days amongst the terrorist appeaser in-crowd. You use the term "ham-handed". This makes me think you may be rather intelligent since it leaves you the out of saying "I never said the US had to totally leave - just stop doing it ham-handedly!". But you weaken your overall position by using such sludgy techniques. Do you believe that if the USA advocates a reactionary isolationist policy the way the old republicans wanted that Islamic extremists would truly ignore the USA? What happens when they overthrow the Saudi government? WHat happens when the world's oil is in the hands of the Taliban? What happens when they realize that the USA is still cowering in its shell and its political process is being manipulated by whining pacifists whose very stance causes more people to be slaughtered than by fighting back against evil? Or do you believe terrrorists aren't evil? They just want to force the world into a yoke where women are stoned to death for kissing their boyfriends and men are beaten to death for singing songs. Those people won't stop until the entire world has been remade in their image or until they are wiped off the face of the earth. Dead. Their ashes scattered, their allies locked up, their homes raised and their children removed. I think the real issue is that you know that you will be dead long before that can happen so you would rather look hip and progressive by siding with the terrorists on the issue of whether or not the just nations should fight back. Either you don't believe there is a war going on or you truly believe it will all go away if we just crawl into a big hole and hope the maniacs will ignore us and slaughter other people instead. Chris Q wrote: Do not forget that Johnson's killing was in revenge for other killings, and that those killings were in revenge for other killings. So what? Don
Terry, If you are so willing to unleash a longwinded stream of insult and invective against me, someone who you clearly don't know or understand, I would be quite surprised to find that you have an accurate vision of anyone. I can only shake my head in wonder that you would imagine I believe half the things you insist that I do. And I ask: are you here to discuss, or do vent your spleen? If the latter is true, I will back down. It is important to vent one's spleen. I believe the Internet is a place with unprecedented potential for exchanging viewpoints, but I also recognize that it is very easy to misapprehend the other person's position. To answer the point I think you might be willing to discuss, I know that you are only against "terrorists". But what is a "terrorist"? No one calls him/herself a "terrorist", so a "terrorist" is a label that you put on other people. After all, we terrorized the Iraqi civilian population by bombing them. Does that make us terrorists? We terrorized the world this century by building an enormous nuclear stockpile. Does that make us terrorists? And who are the terrorists who want us to be their slaves? Slavery isn't practiced in fundamentalist Islamic countries, so why would they suddenly (were they, amazingly enough, to take us over) make us slaves? Yes, there are those in the Islamic countries who say they want to kill us all, but if you spend a little time looking you'll find Westerners who want to kill all Muslims. Does that mean that we ALL want to? Not at all. Terry, it seems clear to me that you are vilifying the "enemy" in order to justify your own anger. "Terrorist" is a convenient term because it can encompass any person you disagree with. Count the number of people who have died since we invaded Iraq, and then count the number who are TRULY terrorists. You write, "You can say all you want "Well Abdullah also thinks he is doing the right thing and BLAH BLAH f***ING BLAH!" the fact is Jeffrey Dahmer thought he was doing the right thing when he ate mens penises. So that doesn't mean jack sh*t." But it does. In order to prevent other Jeffrey Dahmers from cropping up, you study why he thinks he is doing the right thing (and I think you're playing games, because I don't believe he thought he was doing the right thing). You don't study why YOU think he's wrong. You study why HE thinks he's right. That's the only way to stop him. Otherwise you'll be in perpetual combat against him. Finally, you write: "Sorry pal, but I want the ter
-
That is a growing problem I have with Bush. I'm fine with taking out Iraq, but we needed a much broader plan. Blockading all major Islamic ports, taking out airports and major road ways. Throughly isolating the major Islamic nations and demanding a hand over of all known terrorists. If they were not forthcoming than we should have drafted 10 million + Americans and swept the entire area from one end to the other with no more regard for 'human rights' than we gave to Hitler's Germans (Nazi or not). I continue to have little patience with the image of the "moderate" "peaceful" Muslim who is "justifiable angry" with the behavior of the west and of the US. The best of them are frigging assholes and the rest are cowards and murderers. We have to do what ever it takes to get it through their thick skulls that they are a failed, backward culture that has no place in the future of human civilization.
Stan Shannon wrote: but we needed a much broader plan. YES Regardz Colin J Davies
*** WARNING *
This could be addictive
**The minion's version of "Catch :bob: "It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox