Dick Cheney you worthless mound of excrement

The BBQ Pit
141

fush, in which countries have there been abuses that Amnesty International has not address in the same report that they addressed the abuses in Guantanamo? I admit that I have only read their reports on Darfur rather than heard them. But on NPR, the N stands for this particular nation – the USA. I can understand someone talking to US citizens becoming a little more urgent about what the US Government is doing under our own flag.

That doesn’t mean that any of us should be less concerned about the horrors of Darfur. (I’m uncertain of my spelling.) I can see good cause for our government to be involved there.

Not that I know of. And he paid dearly for his mistakes and lies. He did not even run for a second full term.

I apologize for the assumption that you placed no value in the ACLU. And I’m pleased that you do have esteem for the UN Human Rights Commission.

This was adopted by the UN when I was a child. I grew up thinking this was “gospel.” Do you believe these things?Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Articles 5-11 have particular relevance to the topic.

I am always glad when intelligent and reasoning Conservatives stay at SDMB to talk through our differences. I don’t know if the title “conservative” fits you. At any rate, please rethink the true implications of the following:

I wish you didn’t trust the DOD. They don’t list as casualties of the war those whose bodies were damaged in the Middle East in ways that were not directly related to the war itself. If your vechicle rolled over and your spine was crushed, your name is not on the website of those injured in service to their country. They have left off thousands of names that way.

142

If you don’t like my username, you can pony up the money for me to buy a new subscription. I don’t get yours. Doesn’t mean I get to take a cheap shot at it.

As for deconstructing my points, which one is wrong? 1: We have won the war. Iraq (circa Feb 2003) doesn’t exist anymore. Their Army, Navy, and Air Forces were defeated in battle, and now its time for us to help them rebuild.

2: I have indeed seen and read the Patriot Act. I still nowhere in that document where our essential liberties are being taken away. If the left really believes that, then they ought to become staunchly pro-second ammendment, because if the government is actually trying to take your rights from you, it won’t be long before you will have to fight for them. Seeing as the left is still anti-gun…I’m guessing they realize that Patriot isn’t what the spin doctors make it out to be.

3: How about finishing out my statement? Increased supplies of potable water. Improved infant mortality. Improved health care overall. A police force which doesn’t bring people in to be raped and tortured for the personal amusement of folks like Uday and Qsay. More newsprint (and not just the shit that the Ba’athists said was ok.) How about the first free and fair election since the 50’s?
What I said was that there are OTHER WAYS of measuring success, not simply by body count. Body count is easy and it sells. Next time, keep the arguement straight. People may question your integrity if you misrepresent somebody on purpose.

143

Looks like you’ve found a great corporate slogan! :wink:

144

was this you, Fush ? it must have been, but I am too tired to go back and check.

What an incredibly angry and fearful statement to make. To choose national identity over mankind as a whole–shameful, no matter the country.

This saddens me. A world view that not only alludes to but stresses killing off the entire rest of the human race on the planet, so that* Americans* can live in the post-Armageddon world, alone.

I cannot disagree with you strongly enough. I am embarassed to share a country with you. Your sentiments are disgusting and contemptible.

Fitness to lead does not include the unneccessary wasting of human life and talent/skills, not to mention the irreparable harm done by such an action to the planet as a whole–what chance have we of surviving in a hell of our own making? Kill everyone else, so that we can die slowly of radiation burns and disease? Talk about Pyrrhic victories! Old Glory would sure wave with pride then.

I would look for in a President (current admin excepted, of course) qualities that include the acknowledgement that other cultures and peoples deserve our respect and recognition. Help our allies, certainly, but also try to garner MORE allies. NOT alienate this country from the rest of the world thru bully tactics and jingo-ism.

To speak to you in terms you can understand–did it ever occur to you that many Americans live overseas (both oceans, now-it’s tricky) and that their loved ones do too?

You truly can envision a world where EVERY OTHER COUNTRY ON THE PLANET IS OUR ENEMY and we must annihilate them to save ourselves?

You just don’t get it that in annihilating them, we also doom ourselves, do you? Don’t worry, the question was rhetorical.

145

You’re not following me. C’mon, work with me here. Take the cotton out of your ears, the patches off your eyes and pay attention (this further reinforces my thoughts that you may not be able to read up to level.) If the USA were faced with emminent destruction, one that could be prevented by the destruction of every other human on the Earth, and IF the President remembers his oath (to Uphold, Protect, and Defend the Constitution, and in doing so, the people of the US) then the rest of the world will die. I do also remember saying “Worst case scenario” here.

And I believe that your opinion of me has no relevance to the arguement at hand, the op, or anything else for that matter. So, open another thread if you want, but shut the hell up otherwise.

146

I love this one and just about everything this dumbass says. At least he has the balls to admit he’s wrong, which happens with startling regularity. Standard Republican tactics. Ad Hominem (aka “doing the Republican”) attacks against AI are fucken weak if I may say so. You’d get pissed if I suggested you were anti-American for supporting asswipes who are leading our country to ruin now wouldn’t you?

First of all, the reason you have all those shiny technically advanced weapons is because our country can afford them. Our country is wealthy because we have a tradition of open markets and have benefited economically by what some call Globalism. You see, no man or country is an island and a great deal of our wealth depends on the foreign markets where we sell our products. These foreign markets depend on our country as well but, then again, they aren’t on top of the heap because of it either. Needless to say that the cornerstone of this country’s power is its economy which gives us both the resources and technical ability to maintain a strong military.

So what pisses those of us who care about this nation off the most about BU$HCO and the neo-cons is that fact that their idiotic wars are having a detrimental effect on our economy. The dollar is weak. This means we should be selling our products like hotcakes overseas but we are not. Foreigners are not buying our products because they dislike our foreign policy and are growing to hate anything associated with us. That Texas Bull Dyke Karen Hughes aint gonna fix it like the rest of the world are a bunch of rednecks who like BU$HCO style “straight talk”. Now regardless of whether or not this hatred of our country is justified is beside the point: It is happening and we need to deal with it. This underscores the profound stupidity of the current administration. To stay on top, you don’t start wars all over the place for any reason whatsoever. To some degree, people are going to hate us because of the very fact that we are on top but Iraq was a mistake and remains the focus of the world’s ire. However, making us a bigger target is foolish to say the least. In order to maximize our power we should be involved more in diplomacy, making regional powers handle their own problems. Look at successful empires that stayed on top longest. Byzantium was able to exist for 1100 years by doing just that, by engaging in worldwide trade and international diplomacy. We should also maintain a low profile and a state of the art fighting force to maximize our position for as long as possible. So here we are, relying on a robust economy for our place in the world and yet we are making people not buy our products and piled on top all the extra security measures that will take a generational toll on that very economy. Shit, call me un-American but I think BU$HCO is fucking this country up royally.

But why talk about keeping our country on top when the current administration believes it can fight an openly imperialistic war for world domination with a more or less free citizenry and rule of law to hold it back? Hamstringing whatever their plans were before they began. This seems to go against political and military convention. BU$HCO probably believes that it can get away with this by feeding us bullshit all day and 9/11 was the perfect occasion to justify whatever unConstitutional law or lie float they by.

Another thing, I remember in the eighties when AI was reporting abuses in South Africa, Cuba, or the Soviet Union. They were referred to regularly as a compassionate and legitimate organization by politicians of both persuasions. Call me a child of the time but I still view them as such along with a lot of the other people. Hence the reaction they got by publishing this report. It stung…

… and I hope it hurts.

147

Well, I should certainly hope so! The infant mortality rate decreases after a war ends? A whopping 3% from the time before, when the economic embargo encouraged water-borne diseases? Yes, I should bloody well hope so! Not a triumph.

.

Please don’t say anything like this again. Yes, I know you said “amost”, it doesn’t help much. And I mean never, ever

148

Actually, I’m intimately familiar with the UN Decleration of Human Rights. I agree with most points, but not entire document.

You are likely to be the only person on the board who thinks of me as ‘intelligent’ and ‘reasoning.’ Just look to Miller, he’ll give you the links. As for being a ‘conservative,’ I’m not. I sit at the extreme end of both sides of the political spectrum. I do wonder if that makes me a moderate :wink:

The reason I trust the DoD’s counts is because they do account for every cut, scrape, sprain, and whatnot. Its just they define them as killed, wounded by enemy action in combat, wounded by enemy action outside of combat, and other (other being non-combat wounds from things like falls and heart attacks.) I fall into two of those camps. Broke a finger when climbing off a Humvee, and caught a piece of shrapnel with my upper right arm. I know they tally both, even if they don’t post the former.

149

eleanorigby: My original statement was “In my opinion, if the President is unwilling to issue orders which will lead to the deaths of every non-American on the planet so that the USA can survive, then he is unfit to lead.” Not that he should be fired up and happy to do so, or that he should do so without reason. I may have confused the issue by mentioning SIOP, but that was not my point. My point is, it is the Presidents duty to Americans first, and everybody else (ally, neutral, enemy) second.

Luci: All Saddam had to do was stop fucking around. The EU wanted those sanctions down a long time ago, and the US wanted the oil. The blood is on his hands, and I believe he will be taken to task, not us. As far as not saying anything like that again, why not? It certanly sounded that way from World Eater’s post. I called him on it. Rather openly too. Would you rather I simply start name calling as some others in this thread have?

150

Luci: Actually, if you don’t want to reply to that “why not?” in this thread, please e-mail me.

151

Your point relies on hyperbole of a distinctly offensive kind.

I see no real difference in your statement, no softening of the line. I want no part of a President who would choose planet death to save a nation–ANY nation, even my own. They are supposed to be smarter than that. Unfortunately, we are now led by people to whom this is not an unthinkable option, to my mind. How comforting for you. And how devastating for the rest of America.

152

Well, maybe its just me, but I doubt it. Look, I ain’t delicate, rhinoceros ask to borrow my hide if they are planning a knife fight. But I find the insinuation that I might wish harm on ours hugely offensive, and I mean big time and down town. Including a modifier like “almost” doesn’t cut it, there’s no such thing as “almost” a goat-felching bag of pus.

But maybe that’s just me, I got no special clout hereabouts, so freak freely. But no way I just let that pass. No way.

153

I wasn’t speaking to you when I posted that. I was arguing with World Eater. My apologies if there is something in my post that made you think I was addresssing you.

154

eleanorigby: I respect your opinion, but I must disagree with it from my own personal standpoint. When I was a brand new recruit a few years ago, one of the questions that was asked (and it was one of three which were ‘deal breakers’) was “Do you, for religous, moral, or personal reasons, oppose the deployment and use of nuclear weapons?” with a sub-question of “Are you willing to carry out an order to employ such weapons?” To rephrase that, are you willing to be a mass murderer if you were called upon to do so? Would you kill millions of civilians because you were ordered by those individuals placed over you? It didn’t ask if you wanted to. It didn’t ask if you would like to. It asked if you would. Every person in the Armed Forces (and by extension, within the NSC, including the President) must be willing to give and/or carry out that order. Nobody wants to. If I were a missileer, I’d have to eat a bullet after turning my key. The thought gives me chills, and I pray it never happens (I’m also glad I’m an SP instead of a missile control officer.) BUT, if the necessity arises, it will be done. The President will give the order, another member of the NSC will concour. The generals will relay it. The sergeants will ready the weapons, and the missile control officers will kill millions of people.

You said in an earlier post “Won’t Old Glory be flying proudly?” Proudly, no. But it will still fly. As SteveG1 said, MAD and the SIOP are based on games theory, that nobody would be nuts enough to do that. No American would be crazy enough to do it on their own accord. If a President is not willing to do that, then he is willing to put another country ahead of his own, and that is what is unacceptable.

155

fush --I understand the point. I can even see the logic of it–one must be ready to DEFEND one’s country against all enemies. A pre-emptive strike is another thing altogether.

But frankly, I doubt that I could say yes to those questions. I do not find it admirable that there are many that can.

What the hell would be the point of Old Glory flying over planet-wide carnage and death?

If we are to think in hypotheticals: I can imagine a Star Trek like scenario–they beam down and see the devastation with our flag flying…one turns to the other and says, “look, there is a symbol over there–a symbol of these inhabitant’s inabiltiy to overcome fear and lust for powerso that they could work to find peaceful and peacable solutions to conflict.”

Surely a moment of shame, no? Not pride. I would hate to be the last one standing in such a case–because that would mean that I was the LEAST intelligent of all the nations.

I don’t expect you to concur with what I am saying. I just don’t understand the desire for nation over species. Who gives a shit if Old Glory is triumphant? If there is no “visitor from outer space”(I just made that up to illustrate my point) soon enough factions within the USA would start to battle–such is the nature of man. Another Civil War would ensue (if not outright guerilla warfare etc–packs of roaming gangs) over the quickly dwindling resources available.

God help me if I define patriotism as a desire for the above. Dying for a belief or for one’s country is one thing–killing an entire planet in the quest for power or out of fear is quite another.

this is the worst case scenario. Sword rattling and one on one confrontation is another thing altogether. If the World Wars taught us anything, it is that global conflict solves nothing. The quest for ultimate power, disimssing all others, combined with ultimatums is short sighted and even naive. How I wish the cowboy in the Oval Office and his handlers understood that simple premise.

We live in strange times.

156

MY original post was just eaten when my comp crashed, so you’ll have to settle for the short version.

China and Japan own almost 1 trillion in US bonds, the deficit is projected to be a record $477 Billion, the trade deficit is at an all time high, and the dollar is almost at an all time low. Our pathetic dependence on oil and currently dumping hundreds of billions in TWO wars doesn’t help much either.

Please define “win”. The most powerful military in the history of the world has been unable to secure Iraq for 2 years. Color me silly but I would think that “winning” would include a steadily decreasing amount of suicide bombings, civilian deaths, and military deaths.

http://post911timeline.org/USAPA.htm

'nuff said

No they’re lining up because they need a job and some food, not to avenge their fallen brothers. This is besides the point anyway.

For evey “terrorist” (maybe innocent/maybe not) we kill, left in their place is a person, or group of people looking to pick up their fight. Cut the head off and it grows right back. You think all those innocent people detained in AG are going to go home liking the US or figuring out what the hell they can do to help kill us. You think their families, and the families of every civilian with their limbs blown off will blame or praise the US? You think those guys in gitmo are going to go back home and be a bit pissed off? You think our presence in Iraq is making the Muslim world happy or inspiring people to sign up in droves to take out the big Satan?

What good is a cellphone when an IED just blew your arms off? The rising Body count is a pretty fucking major indication of how things are going over there, wouldn’t you agree?

Cell phones and water != getting better
Less civilians getting killed each sequential month = better

Since the opposite is happening, we can conclude things are getting worse.

I’m not even going to dignify this with a response.

157

Yeah, I get your scenario, fucko. I think there are more important things than the oath of the office of the president. Not incinerating over five billion people would be one of those things. This is the sort of conclusion one reaches when you have normal human emotions. I can understand why you, at least, would feel differently.

Nah, I think I’ll stay here and call you names. If you’re going to be sucking up all that valuable oxygen, at least you can pay for it by serving as a whipping boy. Lord knows, you’re not good for much else.

158

"Spike in Iraq attacks exacts bloody toll in May

At least 670 Iraqis, 77 Americans killed last month, officials say"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8050339/

Yep, things are getting better! :rolleyes:

159

He just hasn’t been the same since Buffy ended…

160

Fush, I normally have no use for Teddy Kenney (surprise surprise). However, sometimes he hits the nail right on the head (in spite of himself). Sure he was trying to score political points against his enemy (Bush). But, the words I quoted earlier are still true, and can still be considered “eternal truth”. In short, he was saying “We have met the enemy and he is us.” He was saying exactly the same thing Ike said years before.

JFK was talking about living as we choose and protecting ourselves. He was not talking about forcing our will on others, or setting up some sort of empire. He was not talking about barking orders to the rest of the world.