Page 1 of 3
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 8:16 pm
by GORDON
From here.
Edited By GORDON on 1163368272
Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 9:45 pm
by 98-1151371563
I wonder what it will take before people wake up. 9/11 was insufficient.
Yeah, I wonder what it will take for Americans to wake up to the dangers posed by the Iraqi people.
Everyone knows that Saddam was really working with Al Queda on 9-11... right?
Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 10:27 pm
by TPRJones
What the fuck did his post have to do with Iraq, numbnuts? It was about the war on terror, and how every simple-minded fucktard like yourself feels so bad for those "freedom fighters" that like to hide behind their own small children when shot at, and only dart out to blow up jewish kids from time to time in the name of Allah.
Excuse me if this post is unnacceptably belligerant, but you are a moron.
Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:06 am
by Malcolm
I wonder what it will take before people wake up. 9/11 was insufficient.
Yeah, I wonder what it will take for Americans to wake up to the dangers posed by the Iraqi people.
Why don't you ask all the political enemies of the Ba'ath that were getting executed regularly? You remember the Ba'ath, right? The regime that had a documented history of chemical weapons usage on the Kurds. The regime that came up w\ the lamest excuse for the invasion of another country since the Nazi plan Operation Canned Goods? The regime that used to torture its Olympic athletes if they didn't win gold?
Yea, they were absolutely harmless.
Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 2:49 pm
by Leisher
Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 6:38 pm
by 98-1151371563
TPR, whoever you are, Your post was most certainly unnecessarily belligerent.
Does it make you feel better about your rant to call me a "fucktard" or "numbnuts"? Do you feel that using those names makes you sound more intelligent or gives more weight to your argument?
News Flash - It does not.
I don't know where you get nonsense about me feeling bad for "freedom fighters" but it is obvious you are either making it up on the spot or you got it from some persistent delusion.
Since when do Conservatives deny that Iraq is tied to the "war on terror"?
Go be an ignorant ass to someone else.
Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 6:41 pm
by 98-1151371563
I wonder what it will take before people wake up. 9/11 was insufficient.
Yeah, I wonder what it will take for Americans to wake up to the dangers posed by the Iraqi people.
Why don't you ask all the political enemies of the Ba'ath that were getting executed regularly? You remember the Ba'ath, right? The regime that had a documented history of chemical weapons usage on the Kurds. The regime that came up w\ the lamest excuse for the invasion of another country since the Nazi plan
Operation Canned Goods? The regime that used to torture its Olympic athletes if they didn't win gold?
Yea, they were absolutely harmless.
Well, that post really woke this American up to the dangers those nasty Iraqis pose to me and mine.
Kill em all!
Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 7:12 pm
by GORDON
Iraq is absolutely, positively part of the overall war on terror.
Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 8:11 pm
by Malcolm
Yeah, I wonder what it will take for Americans to wake up to the dangers posed by the Iraqi people.
Why don't you ask all the political enemies of the Ba'ath that were getting executed regularly? You remember the Ba'ath, right? The regime that had a documented history of chemical weapons usage on the Kurds. The regime that came up w\ the lamest excuse for the invasion of another country since the Nazi plan
Operation Canned Goods? The regime that used to torture its Olympic athletes if they didn't win gold?
Yea, they were absolutely harmless.
Well, that post really woke this American up to the dangers those nasty Iraqis pose to me and mine.
Kill em all!
Holy Christ Al-fuckin'-mighty. You're taking the same goddamn isolationist view as Nader & Buchanan.
What have they done? Yes, what have they done (according to wikipedia)...
Several journalists have reported on Saddam's ties to anti-Israeli and Islamic terrorism prior to 2000. Saddam is also known to have had contacts with Palestinian terrorist groups. Early in 2002, Saddam told Faroq al-Kaddoumi, head of the Palestinian political office, he would raise the sum granted to each family of Palestinians who die as suicide bombers in the uprising against Israel to $25,000 instead of $10,000.[25] Some news reports detailed links to terrorists, including Carlos the Jackal, Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas and Osama bin Laden.
Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 8:12 pm
by TPRJones
Does it make you feel better about your rant to call me a "fucktard" or "numbnuts"? Do you feel that using those names makes you sound more intelligent or gives more weight to your argument?
Of course not! That would be stupid. I leave that sort of tactic to the Liberals that like to curse out Republicans and seem to think that it does somehow make them smarter.
I just do it becuase it helps clense my soul of some of the crap you've spewed. And it makes me feel better about the world in general to properly label the fucktards.
Edited By TPRJones on 1155773578
Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 8:38 pm
by GORDON
The other day on Fark a right-wing submission snuck through, making a snarky comment about the recent London terror plot bust, and the cognitively dissonant "we're not at war" attitude of the liberals.
Guarentees a flame war, right?
The main thrust of the angry liberal responses in the comment thread was "Yeah but Bush lied about Iraq."
Which pretty much proves the cognitive dissonance, wot? They are accused of one thing, and respond by completely ignoring the accusation... pretending it didn't exist... and saying something else.
Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:17 pm
by 98-1151371563
Does it make you feel better about your rant to call me a "fucktard" or "numbnuts"? Do you feel that using those names makes you sound more intelligent or gives more weight to your argument?
Of course not! That would be stupid. I leave that sort of tactic to the Liberals that like to curse out Republicans and seem to think that it does somehow make them smarter.
I just do it becuase it helps clense my soul of some of the crap you've spewed. And it makes me feel better about the world in general to properly label the fucktards.
So... you do it because it is stupid and you THINK that "libs" might do the same....
Riiiiiiiiiiight...
Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:20 pm
by 98-1151371563
We are not "at war" in Iraq.
We are Occupying Iraq.
To claim we are still "at war" is the same as claiming we were still at war with germany and Japan during the 1950s.
Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:21 pm
by GORDON
We are not "at war" in Iraq.
We are Occupying Iraq.
To claim we are still "at war" is the same as claiming we were still at war with germany and Japan during the 1950s.
You must not be addressing me since I didn't use those words.
Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:26 pm
by 98-1151371563
So you agree we are not at war.
Ok, just clarifying that.
Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:35 pm
by GORDON
You must have some sort of reading comprehension problem. I apologize for picking on you since you probably can't help it.
Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 11:25 pm
by TPRJones
Does it make you feel better about your rant to call me a "fucktard" or "numbnuts"? Do you feel that using those names makes you sound more intelligent or gives more weight to your argument?
Of course not! That would be stupid. I leave that sort of tactic to the Liberals that like to curse out Republicans and seem to think that it does somehow make them smarter.
I just do it becuase it helps clense my soul of some of the crap you've spewed. And it makes me feel better about the world in general to properly label the fucktards.
So... you do it because it is stupid and you THINK that "libs" might do the same....
Riiiiiiiiiiight...
Um ... no?
Okay, maybe.
Fuck if I know, it's hard to confirm or deny your response because it doesn't seem to make any sort of sense or be in any way related to what I wrote.
I think GORDON may be right. Perhaps you have a learning disorder.
Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 12:11 am
by Vince
We are not "at war" in Iraq.
We are Occupying Iraq.
To claim we are still "at war" is the same as claiming we were still at war with germany and Japan during the 1950s.
Actually, we are "at war" with extremist islamic groups. Well, perhaps it's more accurate to say extremist islamic groups are "at war" with us. Sadly, precious few realize that war has been declared on us.
Their goal (Islamic extremists) is simple. Convert everyone to their religion. Those that don't convert must die.
Explain to me how we negotiate with that. Where's the compromise we can make there?
And by the way, we occupied both Germany and Japan to varying degrees far beyond the 50's. I think we still have military bases in both countries.
Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 12:18 am
by TPRJones
So, were there problems with attacks on US troops and local civilians in Japan and Germany in the 50s? Because otherwise I can't really see the comparison. But I don't recall that sort of thing going on there then.
Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 12:52 am
by Vince
So you agree we are not at war.
Ok, just clarifying that.
If we were at war (which we should be engaged in since it's been declared on us) there would be large fucking smouldering craters popping up with semi-regularity in the rear-views of B-52's, F-16's, F-15's, and F-18's all over the globe.
Also, if we WERE at war there would be quite a few journalists in prison today.
To be honest, I doubt our nation's politicians have the balls to state without doubt and with full clarity that "we declare war". Congress pretty much gave Bush the authority to do so (declare war) when they passed the law saying he could use whatever force he deemed needed to bring the people responsible for Sept 11th to justice.
It was pretty much a wimp out for congress since it let them off the hook. They need not "declare" war, they could simply bask in the glory of victory or bash when we have the inevitable set-backs. The ultimate waffle and position.
