DaniSubTV
Member
Posts: 319
|
name Quoting: name One thing about Holliwood: that industry was heavily subsidised by american govnerment, in its beggining. Quoting: name "Good neighbourhood policy" - during the late forties and fifties. That may be the case just like you said, "in it's beginning". That sure as hell isn't the case any more. Hollywood is very liberal now, to the point of being on the extreme left. All you ever hear from celebrities is critiszm for the U.S. The only celebrity I can think of that's openly a republican is Rob Lowe. As far as spreading the american way of life, any money a movie made outside of the U.S. was almost insignificant (especially compared to now). Movies were made for americans to view, if it there was a market any where else, that was secondary. The plot for most movies took place some where in the U.S. so how can it not show the american way of life....you're not going to see people standing in line for bread or cheese.
|
Multi_Orgasmic Mary
Member
Posts: 2320
|
Quoting: name Now, talking about strategy ... how about a bunch of less than 50 people putting a powerful country at fright? I was right way back when I accused you of spewing cuckolds brownie out of your mouth, everything you say has a distinct odor about it. Any idiot knows a small handful can terrorize the masses, if you think they're so good at it, thank your lucky stars our national mindset doesn't allow it, cause it would be like they never dreamed. Imagine skydivers, and troops dropped of by chopper, move in, slice a bunch of innocent throats and chopper out,,,we could do that forever if we wanted. Mercenaries straight out of the service, answer to no one, no one knows about them, guys like the ones Ross Perot sent into Cambodia to retrieve our POWs, (just like nobody knows where Osama is), what would the world say to that? |
Kalimba
Member
Posts: 10
|
Its worth noting M.O.M. that you completely ignored my post even as you mock other people for their debating s*******s. I dont take these debates permisterally, there will always be different points of view. However, before you slander "liberals" (the people responsible for unions, public schools, unemployment, social security, the civil rights movement and the expasion of women's rights) you should answer or rebut my coherent arguments. I have a BA in poli-sci and am working on a Phd in history, I have lived in four different countries and I am an American born citizen. I say this not to say that I am smarter than anyone but just to say dont waste time attacking me permisterally, just address the points in my previous post that you ignored.
thanks
|
Multi_Orgasmic Mary
Member
Posts: 2320
|
Quoting: Kalimba No country has successfully subjugated a sovereign foreign nation in a great long time my friend. in the 20th century defeating a third world standing army is the easy part. Okay, fine, you want me to waste my time taking on each and every point,,,knowing you have already made up your mind? Your first point being the above quote,,,my remark about "subjugation" was pointed directly at the USSR, starting with Stalin, and continueing till their downfall. I would have expected a studious 9th grader to realize that, let alone a BA. That's not a permisteral attack, but when someone tells me they have a BA and are going for a PHD, I take them at their word and expect they would know this stuff. It's your statment that makes that unlikely. Quoting: Kalimba As for M.O.M., she has stated that she basicaly considers the rest of the world a horde not worthy of any human rights if they impede the ability of westerners to make money. The Vietnamese won their war against the US (thanks to the liberals, lol @ that idiocy) and what exactly did they ever do to threaten America again? Why would they do anything, they got what they wanted, a North and South Vietnam that is comminist governed,,,what was that about "subjugation" not existing? Quoting: Kalimba As for M.O.M., she has stated that she basicaly considers the rest of the world a horde not worthy of any human rights if they impede the ability of westerners to make money. The Vietnamese won their war against the US (thanks to the liberals, lol @ that idiocy) and what exactly did they ever do to threaten America again? Don't put words in my mouth,,,I said progress, and the preservation of the civilized world,,,not a bunch of assholes that base their lives on something some other asshole dreamt back in the 8 century (probably the result of a long hashish weekend). Quoting: Kalimba Because the reamister for the US involving itself in Vietnam was to stop Communism from taking over the world and threatening the US, right? Yet the Vietnamese never threatened the US before or after the horrific war which *******ed millions of their people unneccessarily. The South was basically a French colony, running their government along democratic lines, the communist North attacked the democratic South,,,period! Quoting: Kalimba Keep on with the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" idea and see what happens. How do you think you got Al Queda. I agree, to hell with proping up all these assholes so we can keep a tentative peace, like I've said all along, appeasement (a liberal stance), is not the way you fight a war to win, appeasement is the way you fight a war, and then fight a war, and then fight a war,,,, Quoting: Kalimba I am not into wild ranting against anyones political ideaology but please, back up what you have to say with some historical facts and be civil. The idea of the allies rolling into Russia is laughable, not one serious historian or military tactician would have suggested that and the reamister it didnt happen has nothing to do with liberals. The Us somehow would occupy Russia..find a dictionary and look up a picture of Napoleon....then find one of Hitler...okay, yeah, thats what I thought, the last thing either of them tried to do was invade and occupy russia. I understand that M.O.M.s worldview is basically that anything and everything is justified to maintain US supremacy. I and most other people do not agree. Your talking apples and oranges my friend, even with a half assed attempt we accomplished more in Afghanistan than Russia did in 10 years, it used to take Russia 6 years to build a road, when capitalism took root, the same road took 6 months. One of the most brilliant military minds even to step on a battlefied wanted to go on to Russia, you may have heard of him,,,George S. Patton. Hitler had already broken Russia's back, we were just reaching our stride, it would've been over right after Japan,,,period! Quoting: Kalimba Al Queda can only threaten the Us to the extent that we as a nation allow them to draw us into conflicts that gain us nothing while draining away money, allies and our few remaining civil liberties. If you knew anything of guerrilla strategy the US is doing exactly what they want. Al Queda hated Saddam and now he is gone and the region is in choas. that is their goal, they hate the current leaders in the middle east....and guess what, they hate Iran too. Al Queda is not a real threat to America, only America can destroy itself. Al Queda is our enemy, by their choice, anyone who harbors our enemy puts themselves in the fray, sorry, there's no gray area here, you're either with us or against us. Use the "neighborhood" scenraio to make it simple to understand, the guy across the street *******ed your wife, and your next door neighbor is hiding him in his basement,,,what type of respect do you owe your neighbor? |
Multi_Orgasmic Mary
Member
Posts: 2320
|
Quoting: Kalimba This is the real world M.O.M., if liberals to you are people who dont agree with harboring people who blew up civilian jetliners or razing the cities and massacring all the people in countries with whom we have political disagreementst, then I dont know what to say to you. Maybe you are a facist. All liberals are not bad, in fact they usually have good (if not naive), intentions. However,,,all naive people that want to sit and talk to crocodiles while they're eating, ARE liberals. |
Multi_Orgasmic Mary
Member
Posts: 2320
|
P.S. Wouldn't want to miss touching on ALL your points. I certainly don't consider myself a "fascist",,,I don't know, what do you call someone who only wants everybody to decide for themselves what type of life they want, what kind of job, which God to pray to, how they should be governed? Since the crusades, the only choices Islam gave their enemies was convert or die,,,not ready to convert, and Americans have proven over and over for the past 200 years they were ready to die for what they believe.
|
Multi_Orgasmic Mary
Member
Posts: 2320
|
#337 · Edited by: Multi_Orgasmic Mary
|
 |
Quoting: Kalimba As for the Taliban, you realize that it was conservatives who gave them millions of dollars only right before Sept 11th right? You realize the CIA funded the formation of Al Queda, right? You realize that their beef with us is the UNDEMOCRATIC regimes we prop up in the region, right? Just asking. Again,,,"stranglehold",,,we either kiss their ass or blow them up, the world won't let us blow them up, so we have to kiss their ass. Down the road things wil be different, our technology will ease the burden of oil, and they'll still be in the desert with nothing but sand,,,and that's why they hate us so much,,,that and the fact that we're agianst them "subjugating" women,,,oops, there's that word again, you know, the one you said hasn't been happening for a long time,,,or don't women count as "people" in your book Quoting: Kalimba And hell yeah, I have other solutions and they sure dont involve my death. We live in a new world, and short of just indiscriminate massacres of the young and old, power is not enough to win conflicts in this era. It has been proven time and time again. . Exactly,,,power worked in WW I & WW II because we fought to win, ever since we fought to appease, and I agree, it 's never gonna work, cause you leave behind the bad faction and give them the time to re-enpower and start all over again,,,who fights wars like that, certainly not them, and neither should we. We have to think aout saving the future generations, and if that means wasting the present one, so be it, that's why they call it WAR!!! Hope this response meets to your satisfaction, I think I covered all your points,,,now if only "name" could do the same, instead of re-iterating the same party line. |
Kalimba
Member
Posts: 10
|
You need to read the words around the word "subjugation" Mary.
I said that no foreign country has successfully subjugated a sovereign nation in a very long time.Your responses to that dont make sense. I was certainly not saying that no people, genders or races have been subjugated in a long time. I am talking about successful invasions and occupations. What this has to do with women in Muslim nations or Vietnamese independence is beyond me because I am talking about the
successful invasion and administation of a sovereign nation by outsiders.
Your contention that colonial Vietnam was democratic is simply ridiculous. By its very nature Colonialism is not democratic. How can it be democratic when a foreigner controls your country, exports all the wealth and shuts you of political power. Colonialism is the negation of Democracy.
The "civilized" world? Yet you seem to be advocating genocide against anyone who is living in a country where there are hostile elements. You seem to be saying that wars should be fought with the intention of *******ing all able bodied people who could potentially take up arms against occupiers.
That is genocide, or at the very least wholescale butchery. Not only would the world (thankfully) not allow this but most Americans realize that this is a disgusting and preposterous idea. Obviously, as you stated, your moral viewpoints are very different. Butchery did not help the US defeat the Vietnamese (the US dropped more bombs on Vietnam and Cambodia than were dropped in all of World War One and Two). Butchery did not help South Africa's racist defeat Nelmister Mandela. Butchery did not help the French hold onto Algeria and Butchery did not keep Afghanistan under Soviet control and Butchery did not help the Arab Sudanese control Southern Sudan.
Your whole doomsday scenario about being powerd to convert or die is just silly. If we were not propping up these regimes we would not be under attack. And the idea that somehow, even if we werent in the middle east muslims would swarm the US and ******* us all unless we converted to Islam is laughable. People fight when they are threatened and when they are occupied. The Vietnamese may have espoused world communism but all they wanted was independence. The ANC may have espused world communism but all they wanted was an end to the South African Facist/racist police state. The majority of people sympathetic to the Islamic cause simply want the US out of the middle east and to stop supporting Israel. Not only could they NEVER EVER invade the US, only the most insane fanatics would even want to do that.
They hate the US because of the fact that we have technology and are against them subjugating women? So, its not because:
1) We support the Israelis against the Palestinians and prvide the Israelis with military and poilitical support
2) We prop up autocratic regimes in their countries that retard the nations progress, and use violence to stay in power
3) We invade their countries under false pretenses
4) We have opposed Democracy in the region for a long time because we prefferred easy access to oil to the rights of Arab people.
5) We have grown wealthy from their oil while funneling the money to the gangsters who control their nations.
6) We accuse them of terrorism while harboring our own terrorists including, notably, a man who blew up civilian jetliners.
It couldnt be any of those reamisters could it? lol
Hiding behind women and youngren? Oh, you mean, like every guerilla movement ever, from the IRA to the ANC to the Vietcong to the French Resistance. If you want people to line up and fight trench warfare against vastly superior firepower, you are in the the wrong century.
How about we look at a successful anti-terrorism campaign:
The IRA vs Great Britain. The IRA had always painted themselves as incapable of compromise, they *******ed civillians, *******ped people, bombed trains and public streets, ***ed their enemies and carried on a vulgar war of attrition to power the UK out of Ireland. They swore they would stop at nothing but in the end, the solution was a political one.
Saddam Hussein was never sheltering Al Queda, to think that is ridiculous. Al Queda was diametrically opposed to Saddam and unlike us they dont play the "enemy of my enemy" game.
Your path is a path we would be wise not to choose. The only exitential threat in this conflict is the one we pose to ourselves by destroying our own nation.
|
name
Member
Posts: 1287
|
When 'Multi-Orgasmic-Mary' can't argue and debate logically with someone, she tries to insult him/her. That's tipycal ... and yes, she
also tries to put a label on you. I was right about not directing the
word to her any longer, but she insisted on commenting my posts (in her own 'cuckolds brownie-spewing' way, of course ...). Hey, Mary, f you cannot debate, keep silent!
Danisub, I was talking about a lot of movies that were filmed in Europe or other continents, but where the main characters and the ideology that they carried was, of course, all american. Do you really belive Hollywood is left-winger now?
|
name
Member
Posts: 1287
|
US war strategy: OUTSOURCING (get the others to do the 'job'). The poorer in the US, often imigrants, or troops from smaller countries that need american economic or political support, those are some of the people who are sent to fight the american battles around the world. Even the british are withdrawing (now that they fully understand they were sent to war by means of a false dossi� on "Iraqi WMD"). So ... like in Rome ... get the poor to do the fighting, while war tycoons (those who plan it or who profit from it) sit inside their air-conditioning rooms, takeing scotch, hot cofee or tea!
|
Multi_Orgasmic Mary
Member
Posts: 2320
|
#341 · Edited by: Multi_Orgasmic Mary
|
|
Quoting: Kalimba You need to read the words around the word "subjugation" Mary. I said that no foreign country has successfully subjugated a sovereign nation in a very long time.Your responses to that dont make sense. I was certainly not saying that no people, genders or races have been subjugated in a long time. I am talking about successful invasions and occupations. What this has to do with women in Muslim nations or Vietnamese independence is beyond me because I am talking about the successful invasion and administation of a sovereign nation by outsiders. Okay,,,see, this is why the world is in unresolved conflict. No permisteral offense intended, but,,, 1). What "you're talking about" isn't an issue here, you originally were responding to what "I" was talking about. 2). When you responded, you misunderstood me in the first place, since I was talking about WW II and Russia, it went without saying that it was a "long time ago" when a nation or sovereign govenment was "subjagated", yet you brought up world destruction as an outcome. So reading the words around the subject isn't really the problem, it's comprehending them. How can you understand if someone is agreeing with you or not, if you don't understand what he's saying. This happens a lot in face to face communication too, the problem lies in people prejudging and having their own agenda to put forth, so they often jump the gun and state their position, while forming it in their head, they miss important dialog (or don't miss it and just ignore it), and continue with their rant. When called on it, they usually revert to changing the subject to something they can save face with, or spout the "party line'. I'm not saying this is the case with you, I'm just saying you missed my point by assuming I meant attacking Russia under circumstances that exist today, as opposed to continueing on from Berlin during WW II. Quoting: Kalimba Your contention that colonial Vietnam was democratic is simply ridiculous. By its very nature Colonialism is not democratic. How can it be democratic when a foreigner controls your country, exports all the wealth and shuts you of political power. Colonialism is the negation of Democracy. Sorry,,,you are correct, I should have described it as a non-agressive, peacefull colony of the French,,,who were attacked by the agressive communist North without cause. Is that better, does that help the worldwide cause to convict America for being evil and intervening? Quoting: Kalimba Your whole doomsday scenario about being powerd to convert or die is just silly. If we were not propping up these regimes we would not be under attack. And the idea that somehow, even if we werent in the middle east muslims would swarm the US and ******* us all unless we converted to Islam is laughable. People fight when they are threatened and when they are occupied. The Vietnamese may have espoused world communism but all they wanted was independence. The ANC may have espused world communism but all they wanted was an end to the South African Facist/racist police state. The majority of people sympathetic to the Islamic cause simply want the US out of the middle east and to stop supporting Israel. Not only could they NEVER EVER invade the US, only the most insane fanatics would even want to do that. Okay,,,now you've finally tore off the veil of mystery, you're a total liberal, and not the good kind, the "blind" kind, the kind I've been referring to, the ones responsible for the wars that took place due to complacency. "Only a fanatic would attack America",,,H-E-L-L-O!!! 3,000 people on 9-11, ask any general, that's a good ******* number on any given day of any campaign,,,"Fanatic"??? Lets see, you strap bombs to yourself, you leave your kids in cars that are rigged with bombs so as to avoid suspicion,,,,exactly what dictionary are you using for yor description of "fanatic"? Quoting: Kalimba They hate the US because of the fact that we have technology and are against them subjugating women? So, its not because: 1) We support the Israelis against the Palestinians and prvide the Israelis with military and poilitical support 2) We prop up autocratic regimes in their countries that retard the nations progress, and use violence to stay in power 3) We invade their countries under false pretenses 4) We have opposed Democracy in the region for a long time because we prefferred easy access to oil to the rights of Arab people. 5) We have grown wealthy from their oil while funneling the money to the gangsters who control their nations. 6) We accuse them of terrorism while harboring our own terrorists including, notably, a man who blew up civilian jetliners. It couldnt be any of those reamisters could it? lol None of which would be necessary or possible if not for all the people involved living their lives like nursery rhymes,,,near as I can tell, there should also be Santa Clausites, Easter Bunnians, and Toothfairyists. If humanity had any balls and could face it's own mortality, we could get on with living and let living, rather than re-enpowering our beliefs by getting everyone to agree with us, so we wouldn't be so scared of dieing. One thing I give the muslims credit for, if you gonna believe in fairytales, you might as well pick one that has 72 virgins in it,,,now there's something to LOL about. Quoting: Kalimba Hiding behind women and youngren? Oh, you mean, like every guerilla movement ever, from the IRA to the ANC to the Vietcong to the French Resistance. If you want people to line up and fight trench warfare against vastly superior firepower, you are in the the wrong century. Granted it was in a different century, but we fought a guerilla war aginst the Spanish, French, and English, and never hid behind youngren. As for modern times, you're right, it would be suicide to fight in the trenches today,,,but what happened to the "political process" you described? You expect us to deal with terrorists politically, yet they can deal with us by using bombs? Are you a member of the ACLU? Cause that double standard sounds pretty familiar. I try to give credit where credit is due, try not to prejudge or pidgen hole people, I take them at face value and make my decisions as I'm exposed to their thought process. I started off responding to you assuming you were intelligent and just misunderstood me, had opposing views but were open minded, now I see you're basically a sponge with a filter, you absorb the party line and filter out any intelligent rebuttal,,,sorry for you in that respect. |
Multi_Orgasmic Mary
Member
Posts: 2320
|
Quoting: name Even the british are withdrawing (now that they fully understand they were sent to war by means of a false dossi� on "Iraqi WMD"). OMG,,,if I have to hear one more liberal bring up WMD's again I think I'm gonna puke. Sorry if you assholes are too stupid to read the writing on the wall, but you take a man who used gas on the Kurds, add to that, every intelligence organization in the world believing he had WMD's, and top it off with the knowledge the Saddam HIMSELF thought he had WMD's, but he was mislead by his people. Since the masses are so wrapped up in living their lives like fairy tales, let me see if I can recall a proper parable that suits this situation,,,Oh yeah,,,The Boy Who Cried Wolf,,,I think that one should pretty much cover it. I can hear the press corps now, "Mr. President,,,can you explain all the deaths from the gas attack in Iraq"? "I mean, didn't the CIA tell you he had WMD's"? Didn't all the other intelligence organizations tell you he had WMD's"? "Didn't he already use them on the Kurds"? Why didn't you supply our boys with gasmasks"? Give it a rest!!! |
Kalimba
Member
Posts: 10
|
Mary, you are going to have to read my initial post and I await your admission that you are the one who needs reading comprehension. Quoting: Kalimba No country has successfully subjugated a sovereign foreign nation in a great long time my friend. in the 20th century defeating a third world standing army is the easy part. As for M.O.M., she has stated a) Clearly I was not even refferring to you with the subjugation post, I was reffering to the other permister and explaining why its ridiculous to think we can succeed in Iraq. Hence the "as for M.O.M." because then I tackled your argument. Go back and read it. b) I said nothing about invading Russia after WW2 resulting in nuclear war since obviously they didnt even have a bomb. I said it was a foolish endeavour for completely different reamisters. So yeah, you are totally wrong on that entire point. And you are the one who is doing the misunderstanding. Quoting: Multi_Orgasmic Mary Sorry,,,you are correct, I should have described it as a non-agressive, peacefull colony of the French,,,who were attacked by the agressive communist North without cause. Is that better, does that help the worldwide cause to convict America for being evil and intervening? Colonialism is inherently violent and exploitative. The Vietnamese had as much if not more right to throw the French out as America had to throw out the British. Freeing the Vietnamese people from Colonialism is a damn good "cause". No people have the right to excercise dominion over another foreign country and steal from them, I'm sorry. I am firmly against colonialism and so is every reputable historian. Imagine the British sitting around saying that the US kicked them out for no reamister. Give me a break. There is a reamister why colonialism was smashed around the world and that is because it was inherently exploitative and wrong. No two ways about it. If somebody invaded the US and did what the French did in Vietnam you are damn right that I would not sit here and allow myself to be subjugated by a foreign power. Quoting: Multi_Orgasmic Mary Okay,,,now you've finally tore off the veil of mystery, you're a total liberal, and not the good kind, the "blind" kind, the kind I've been referring to, the ones responsible for the wars that took place due to complacency. "Only a fanatic would attack America",,,H-E-L-L-O!!! 3,000 people on 9-11, ask any general, that's a good ******* number on any given day of any campaign,,,"Fanatic"??? Lets see, you strap bombs to yourself, you leave your kids in cars that are rigged with bombs so as to avoid suspicion,,,,exactly what dictionary are you using for yor description of "fanatic"? My point there was that while most muslim people would support doing nearly anything to get foreigners out of the countries and address the other grievances they have with US interference in their countries, very few would be interested in trying to convert the US by power. There are always going to be a few fanatics everywhere, the thing is that without the support of the masses their threat is greatly diminished. The threat of being powerd to convert or die is about as real as the idea that the Vietnamese freedom fighters were bent on turning the US into a communist state or that the IRA would not stop until they had conquered England. Islamic fanatics pose a threat to the US but the threat is really not one beyond that of random attacks. Thus the best way to deal with it is to remove the suppot they have from the masses who only support because of the grievances I listed before. The majority of those people would not send their kids off to die to convet the US anymore than the average American would send our soldiers to die to convert Arabs to Christianity. Quoting: Multi_Orgasmic Mary Granted it was in a different century, but we fought a guerilla war aginst the Spanish, French, and English, and never hid behind youngren. As for modern times, you're right, it would be suicide to fight in the trenches today,,,but what happened to the "political process" you described? You expect us to deal with terrorists politically, yet they can deal with us by using bombs? Are you a member of the ACLU? Cause that double standard sounds pretty familiar. I try to give credit where credit is due, try not to prejudge or pidgen hole people, I take them at face value and make my decisions as I'm exposed to their thought process. I started off responding to you assuming you were intelligent and just misunderstood me, had opposing views but were open minded, now I see you're basically a sponge with a filter, you absorb the party line and filter out any intelligent rebuttal,,,sorry for you in that respect. Actually what I am suggesting is use politics to solve some of muslims LEGITIMATE grievances with the US and use politics to rebuild Afghanistan and use politics to correct the damage done by the war in Iraq to our international stature. And use power to stop, capture or disrupt international terror networks that continue to pursue violence. In other words, do the only things that have ever worked in this Century to stop violent conflicts.How that makes me part of some "party line" I have no idea. I am not a democrat by any means but I am a liberal. Yup, one of those idiots who brought you: The minimum wage Unemployment insurance Social Security Unionionization The Civil Rights movement Women's Lib International standards of human rights Child labor laws And thats just the tip of the iceberg. But I am sure you will respond by calling me more names instead of thinking about how the threat from Al Queda can actually be confronted SUCCESSFULLY. It wont be by *******ing all the people who dont agree with us in the middle east, ill tell you that much. It can be solved by addressing the political conditions that I listed, reassessing our alliances and support for illigitimate regimes, and finally a global concerted and long term plan to thwart those FANATICS who will not be satisfied no matter what. You see, they are a tiny minority, and once the majority of the arab world has had their very LEGITIMATE grievances addressed, the FANATICS will be fighting alone. And then they will be done. You see what Al Queda wants is for us to turn all muslims into fanatics for them by indiscrimintaely attacking the muslim world. That is what guerilla war is about, helping your enemy help you by pushing the masses onto your side. Quoting: Multi_Orgasmic Mary OMG,,,if I have to hear one more liberal bring up WMD's again I think I'm gonna puke. Sorry if you assholes are too stupid to read the writing on the wall, but you take a man who used gas on the Kurds, add to that, every intelligence organization in the world believing he had WMD's, and top it off with the knowledge the Saddam HIMSELF thought he had WMD's, but he was mislead by his people. Since the masses are so wrapped up in living their lives like fairy tales, let me see if I can recall a proper parable that suits this situation,,,Oh yeah,,,The Boy Who Cried Wolf,,,I think that one should pretty much cover it. I can hear the press corps now, "Mr. President,,,can you explain all the deaths from the gas attack in Iraq"? "I mean, didn't the CIA tell you he had WMD's"? Didn't all the other intelligence organizations tell you he had WMD's"? "Didn't he already use them on the Kurds"? Why didn't you supply our boys with gasmasks"? Give it a rest!!! << 1 ... 9 . 10 . 11 . 12 . 13 . You cant really believe this in 2007. Everyone involved has admitted that the CIA never thought Saddam had weapons, and neither did most other intelligence organizations. In fact, the CIA told the Bush regime that the uranium documents were fake before Colin Powell went and waved them at the UN. Iraq did not have the weapons and everyone knew it, they didnt even have a functional air power after 10 years of sanctions. If they had really had all those weapons you better believe the Israelis would have struck them a long time ago. Stop kidding yourself, this was a war Bush started planning right after 9-11, it has been well documented, even George Tenet said it was all bullcuckolds brownie and he was the director of the CIA. Need I go on? You should leave this particular point alone because it is completely laughable and the truth has been widely documented |
Thug
Member
Posts: 691
|
MOM, do you have to begin every apology of bullying politics with a blaspemous exclamation. There really is no excuse coming from an articulate mind. Truth and lies have both been widely documented - victors write the histories. Know a man by his deeds not by his speeches. People of good intention should not belittle people; by doing so it ameliorates your democratic credentials. It takes a brave man (or indeed a brave woman) to admit that they may have been wrong. To defend your pit bull terrier after it has mauled half the kids in the street illustrates two defects of character: keeping such a dangerous natural in the first place, and secondly assuming you have some divine lease on truth.
|
Multi_Orgasmic Mary
Member
Posts: 2320
|
Quoting: Kalimba Mary, you are going to have to read my initial post and I await your admission that you are the one who needs reading comprehension. I see you've learned how to use the "quote" button, perhaps that'll help make who you're actually responding to a little clearer in the future. Quoting: Kalimba My point there was that while most muslim people would support doing nearly anything to get foreigners out of the countries and address the other grievances they have with US interference in their countries, very few would be interested in trying to convert the US by power. Bullcuckolds brownie,,,ALL Arab countries want our downfall, most are to priviledged or cowards to actually get involved, so they sit on the side lines and supply funds, national programming that idealizes martyrdom, a school curriculum that espouses it from the get go. Quoting: Kalimba The minimum wage Unemployment insurance Social Security Unionionization The Civil Rights movement Women's Lib International standards of human rights Child labor laws I was a democrat when all that stuff happened too, but the extreme left has made the term "liberal" equivalant to "Kleenex",,,you may need a tissue, but most people ask for a "Kleenex",,,due to the extremists, "liberal" now means a lot more than someone who is altruistic. Quoting: Kalimba That is what guerilla war is about, helping your enemy help you by pushing the masses onto your side. The masses are on their side, they always have been, they're training the next generation,,,sorry, but nothing short of turning the whole place into a giant mirror will ever solve it,,,it would make us a lighthouse to the solar system. And of course, in keeping with the world view of us, we won't tell any visitors from other galaxies how we made such a giant mirror. LOL Quoting: Kalimba You should leave this particular point alone because it is completely laughable and the truth has been widely documented Hmmm,,,so then we're also suppose to ignore not 1, not 2, not 3, but 16 UN sanctions against Iraq (of which any 3 called for military action), not to mention the 17th that Bush through in for good measure that didn't pass because of corrupt French govt., and other cowardly nations (remember the French, Iraq owed them billions for illegal arms they sold them). |
Multi_Orgasmic Mary
Member
Posts: 2320
|
#346 · Edited by: Multi_Orgasmic Mary
|
|
Quoting: Thug MOM, do you have to begin every apology of bullying politics with a blaspemous exclamation. There really is no excuse coming from an articulate mind. Truth and lies have both been widely documented - victors write the histories. Know a man by his deeds not by his speeches. People of good intention should not belittle people; by doing so it ameliorates your democratic credentials. It takes a brave man (or indeed a brave woman) to admit that they may have been wrong. To defend your pit bull terrier after it has mauled half the kids in the street illustrates two defects of character: keeping such a dangerous natural in the first place, and secondly assuming you have some divine lease on truth. First off,,,articulation is useless if not backed by intelligence. I would seriously doubt the intelligence of anyone who argued with me that I'd better be good, cause Santa has a list and he's checking it twice. There is abso;utely zero diffence from that and any organized religion,,,zero! Off New Guinea is an island that was untouched by modern man till a plane crashed there during WW II,,,in the `60's a group went there and found an altar, the altar was in front of facsimile of their God,,,a wooden structure made from branches in the shape of an Army Piper Cub reconnaissance plane. I can respect all the intelligence of titans of industry, generals, doctors and lawyers, all the great minds of the world, but if I ask them if they believe in religion and they say yes, I know I'm conversing with an ignorant individual and he might as well be telling me I'm gonna find coal in my stocking this December 25th,,,or is that the 4th, or the 9th, or was it in November? I forget, exactly what day did the Roman Emperor decide to combine Christmas with the Roman pagan holiday so as to bring everyone together? Doesn't really matter,,,since IT'S ALL BULLSHIT!!! Oh,,,by the way, I was brought up Catholic, received baptism, communion, and confirmation, as did my husband, who was an epistle reader during mass. Any religion that tells you YOU'RE gonna go to heaven, but everybody else isn't, is full of cuckolds brownie, the only reamister for organized religion is to convert as many as possible, cause that's how you get your money,,,you don't get any money from non-believers. Whe I was growing up and putting my weekly offerings in the plate, I asked what it was for, "that's so the church can help the poor and misfortuned" I was told, I was also taught how Jesus sought poverty for himself and his followers,,,yet the priests rode around in Cadillacs,,,not Chevy's or Fords,,,CADILLACS! If Jesus showed up today half the christians would denounce him as insane (and rightfully so), and the other half would call him a blasphemer and want to ******* him. A stage magician, or almost any scientist today would be called a God or a prophet by ancient standards, yet you sit here today and call me a blasphemer? What can I say? How about,,,GROW UP!!! |
Keyless
Member
Posts: 83
|
This thread isn't directed at anyone in particular. I'm just making some permisteral observations.
Some points to consider...
The reamister we "liberals" keep bringing up issues like WMDs are because it was the entire basis on which going to war with Iraq was founded. Dismissing it's inclusion as if it's some kind of abstraction is intellectually dishonest.
Some believe that we should have pushed through and taken over the USSR at the end of the conflict with Germany. A couple of factors to consider:
1) Without the Soviet Union's help, it's almost certain that we would have lost WWII. Hitler broke his non-aggression pact with the USSR, and having to fight on two, divided fronts probably cost him complete victory. We were supposed to reward their assistance in defeating Hitler by turning around and backstabbing them? If your answer is yes, we have a fundamental difference in the way we view foreign policy.
2) If you think that insurgency in Iraq is bad now, the resistance in an occupied Soviet Union would blow your mind. Trying to pacify that much territory, with such a determined and large enemy would have been impossible and foolhardy.
The immigration issue:
When citing statistics, please include a source for information. Stats and numbers are great, and usually inaccurate. I'd like to take a hard look at some figures before I can comment on specifics.
Here's a hypothetical situation for you...
Say you were able to remove every illegal worker in this country, and send them back to their country of origin. All of the jobs formally held by immigrants were suddenly filled with American citizens. And what do the majority of majority citizens do? They form unions. Unions drive up the cost of labor, the company owner passes the cost onto you, the consumer.
What is the cost to our economy then? Any benefit gained through removing migrant and illegal workers is offset by the inflation that would be caused by increased worker wages. Your little brother might have a new cush job that a Mexican once did, scrubbing toilets, but the cost of living for your family just went up by 20%.
I hope you enjoy paying Three Bucks for a head of lettuce, because that's about how much it will cost in a new, non migrant culture.
Another thing conservative pundits forget to mention; Most long-term illegals in this country steal a name and social security number from a US citizen, and pay payroll taxes into the system, without ever getting a return on that money, because they can't prove their identity upon retirement, or at tax time. Without this additional outpay, social security would be much worse off than it already is.
You want to make sure that illegals pay in as much as they get out? Make them US citizens.
Have them take a citizenship test. If they are dedicated enough to pass it, as legal immigrants are, then they deserve to be part of our "Melting Pot."
If they fail, send them home with a warning to never come back. Problem solved.
I know that this opinion won't be very popular with the conservative alarmists, but we have it pretty good in this country. The vast majority of us have jobs, and are able to pay our bills, while still being able to spare a little extra on the things that make us happy.
The White Majority, (of which I am a member, so don't throw the race card), still finds ways to complain, and cast blame at the feet of outside "enemies", that make our lives harder by only a fraction.
At the turn of the last century, it was the Irish, and the Italians, and the "Niggers." Then the Communists. Mexicans. Now, Muslim Extremists.
Stop blaming everyone else for your problems, and take control of your own destiny and actions.
|
corn bread red
Member
Posts: 34
|
This used to be a fun place. And watching the wife fuck others ( she prefers black men) is no fantasy at my house. We enjoy ourselfs and are not hurting anyone. Don't be pissed off at us cause you cant get you partner to try it, Just leave. Better yet go fuck a goat or something.  |
Thug
Member
Posts: 691
|
The world according to MOM. The girl who was caught stuffing her face with someone elses birthday cake and found it easier to blame the pet dog than tell the truth. Be as closed minded and foul mouthed as you want. You quote your credentials and your inference to anyone who doesn't live up to those (sic) that they are sad, misguided or uninteligent now tells me all that I require to know about you. Some of us here have been generous with our patience but you ecen denigrate them. That is the only thing I find sad.
|
Thug
Member
Posts: 691
|
corn bread red :- Your admonition to use some poor domestic natural (zoopholia may be legal in your neck of the woods) because you are unable to tolerate other's sincere beliefs (the initial thread was about racism and sexuality) would be hilarious ..... after 15 beers in some seedy bar. ha!!  |
Multi_Orgasmic Mary
Member
Posts: 2320
|
Quoting: Keyless This thread isn't directed at anyone in particular. I'm just making some permisteral observations. Some points to consider... The reamister we "liberals" keep bringing up issues like WMDs are because it was the entire basis on which going to war with Iraq was founded. Dismissing it's inclusion as if it's some kind of abstraction is intellectually dishonest. WRONG!!! It was the reamister we were able to use because all the cowards and corrupt UN reps refused to act on their own initiatives,,,16 times! Some believe that we should have pushed through and taken over the USSR at the end of the conflict with Germany. A couple of factors to consider: 1) Without the Soviet Union's help, it's almost certain that we would have lost WWII. Hitler broke his non-aggression pact with the USSR, and having to fight on two, divided fronts probably cost him complete victory. We were supposed to reward their assistance in defeating Hitler by turning around and backstabbing them? If your answer is yes, we have a fundamental difference in the way we view foreign policy. Blatantly wrong,,,the war in Europe would have ended just like the war in the Pacific. Just because you act first doesn't mean you're wrong, when our soldiers and the Russians met in East Berlin everyone was on edge, why would that be if there was no reamister for distrust? And were those who thought we couldn't trust the USSR wrong? 2) If you think that insurgency in Iraq is bad now, the resistance in an occupied Soviet Union would blow your mind. Trying to pacify that much territory, with such a determined and large enemy would have been impossible and foolhardy. What's to pacify,,,lets see, live an equivalant life of an American,,,or bread lines for 50 years,,,Hmmm,,,let me think about that,,,nope, don't have to! The Russian people are good people, it's their government that sucks. The immigration issue: When citing statistics, please include a source for information. Stats and numbers are great, and usually inaccurate. I'd like to take a hard look at some figures before I can comment on specifics. Here's a hypothetical situation for you... Say you were able to remove every illegal worker in this country, and send them back to their country of origin. All of the jobs formally held by immigrants were suddenly filled with American citizens. And what do the majority of majority citizens do? They form unions. Unions drive up the cost of labor, the company owner passes the cost onto you, the consumer. What is the cost to our economy then? Any benefit gained through removing migrant and illegal workers is offset by the inflation that would be caused by increased worker wages. Your little brother might have a new cush job that a Mexican once did, scrubbing toilets, but the cost of living for your family just went up by 20%. I hope you enjoy paying Three Bucks for a head of lettuce, because that's about how much it will cost in a new, non migrant culture. Another thing conservative pundits forget to mention; Most long-term illegals in this country steal a name and social security number from a US citizen, and pay payroll taxes into the system, without ever getting a return on that money, because they can't prove their identity upon retirement, or at tax time. Without this additional outpay, social security would be much worse off than it already is. You want to make sure that illegals pay in as much as they get out? Make them US citizens. Have them take a citizenship test. If they are dedicated enough to pass it, as legal immigrants are, then they deserve to be part of our "Melting Pot." If they fail, send them home with a warning to never come back. Problem solved. I know that this opinion won't be very popular with the conservative alarmists, but we have it pretty good in this country. The vast majority of us have jobs, and are able to pay our bills, while still being able to spare a little extra on the things that make us happy. The White Majority, (of which I am a member, so don't throw the race card), still finds ways to complain, and cast blame at the feet of outside "enemies", that make our lives harder by only a fraction. At the turn of the last century, it was the Irish, and the Italians, and the "Niggers." Then the Communists. Mexicans. Now, Muslim Extremists. On a "best case" scenario, they add 9 thousand dollars a year to our economy (mostly through sales tax), and they use 30 thousand in resources (medical, school, welfare). Mexican air is the same as ours (except Mexico City), the dirt is the same, and their climate temporate, so it seems the only thing wrong with Mexico,,,is Mexicans (meaning their politicians and corrupt officials). So we should import them here so our life can be influenced by them and be just like theirs? Here's an idea, and at least in twenty years there would be some real benefit to the Mexican people,,,another 4 or 5 states to the Union, Mexico, Guadalajara, Baja, etc. I mean how dumb do you have to be to not see that everything we have, they can have, most of them want to come here, there's no reamister other than corrupt govenment, they've been fighting amongst themselves for centuries. My husband worked on roofing and airconditiong in Florida, you gonna tell me working in Mexico is any hotter, yet if my husband insisted on a siesta he'd be fired, so I guess the people aren't completely innocent, maybe they should try a better work ethic. But I guess as long as we have wealthy people that remain untouched, yet find solice in the form of relieving there greedy guilt by throwing the peons a bone, it'll be easier for them to steal our country, rather than fix their own!!! And I should stop blaming everyone else for my problems? By the way,,,in the next 20 years you'll go from being the "White Majority" to just another "beetchin, steenkin, blanco"! Comprende? Stop blaming everyone else for your problems, and take control of your own destiny and actions. |
Multi_Orgasmic Mary
Member
Posts: 2320
|
Quoting: Thug The world according to MOM. The girl who was caught stuffing her face with someone elses birthday cake and found it easier to blame the pet dog than tell the truth. Be as closed minded and foul mouthed as you want. You quote your credentials and your inference to anyone who doesn't live up to those (sic) that they are sad, misguided or uninteligent now tells me all that I require to know about you. Some of us here have been generous with our patience but you ecen denigrate them. That is the only thing I find sad. Your normally intelligent "sounding"responses (albeit wrong), are one thing, but this last post is just plain off the wall. Quoting: Thug corn bread red :- Your admonition to use some poor domestic natural (zoopholia may be legal in your neck of the woods) because you are unable to tolerate other's sincere beliefs (the initial thread was about racism and sexuality) would be hilarious ..... after 15 beers in some seedy bar. ha!! And this one seems like you felt you needed to say something,,,but didn't know what,,,I suggest a good nights rest and a little less coffee before your next response. |
numnut
Member
Posts: 53
|
Dont post in this type o cuckolds brownie normaly but,
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA........................HA HA........................HA HA HAHAH.....HA HARRRRRR
You people ******* me, you honestly do! HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
|
John Thkoog
Member
Posts: 169
|
How did a stupid post bby a troll turn into a heated political debate?
Hasn't anyone ever heard the phrase "DON'T FEED THE TROLL"?
|
name
Member
Posts: 1287
|
"Haunted by trolls" lol  lol  lol  |
name
Member
Posts: 1287
|
Who's affraid of 'em, anyway?  |
MrBigCuckold
Admin
Posts: 5646
|
topic locked
|
