I will have to look for a link, but she was labeled “Baghdad Betty” for protesting the 1991 Iraq War.
This guy just does the same thing over and over and over. I don’t understand what it takes to get a permaban.
I disagree with this.
If someone starts a pit thread where - based on the target, the board makeup (and their extensive familiarity with same), and the issue - they have 100% confidence that the mass of fellow posters will be strongly on their side, then that’s the functional equivalent of “showing up for the pile-on”.
When Guinastasia takes a strong stand on something where she’s going against board sentiment - or where she’s even risking going against board sentiment - then you’ve seen something. Until then, nothing.
Here’s an article she wrote- framed as a letter to her mother- regarding being labeled Baghdad Betty:
The 1991 Iraq war had a broad global coalition and was well executed both politically and militarily. Of all the wars that have been fought by the U.S. it is among the most justifiable. Protesting it does deserve some criticism.
You are 100% right about the pile-on. I stand corrected. Otherwise, I stand by my assessment of Guinastasia.
Like, “F-P and Scumpup are a couple of stand-up guys with a lot of interesting things to say,” or is absurdism excluded from our framework?
That’s nice. But the topic of this thread is whether protesting that war counts “smearing the troops.” It’s not a question of whether or not her protest was right or wrong, but whether she was denigrating the U.S. military because she didn’t agree with one military action. I would hope that you would agree that this is not the case.
I don’t know if you meant it that way, but this is exactly the sort of thing people use to argue an indefensible position. I’m sure you’ve heard of it: moving the goalposts.
Maybe you’re right, and she does deserve some criticism for her stance. I was a little kid when it happened, and I’ve not really researched it. But I can unequivocally say that publicly opposing a military action is not an attack on our troops.
That’s the talk of people who want a military dictatorship.
Edit: seems her argument was that there was too much civilian damage.
I guess there can be some amusement in seeing conservative assfucks who can’t come up with a counterargument popping in to hypocritically attack the OP for the very thing they are currently trying to do, but it has jack shit to do with this thread. It’s just a distraction because you can’t argue that Guin is wrong.
And, yes, I’m being condescending as fuck. So are you shitheads. Go fuck yourselves, you colossal twats. We know you’re here to defend a fellow conservative. You’re just not actually any good at it.
Yeah, where I come from, if the best people can come up with are inane ad-hominems and of-topic threadshits, that’s taken to mean that the people doing that in fact know and agree that the person they’re arguing against is actually right, and they just don’t have the balls to admit it.
It’s heart warming, in a way, to see one gossipy little bitch come to the defense of another. Make sure Humpy gives you a handy-j under The Mean Girls Table over at your other home.
Maybe if you were better at it.
This. In ALL its glory, this.
I don’t agree with her protest, nor was I aware of it. But jim’s son drive-by obit thread shit was pretty fucked up.
World War II, this, and maybe the Revolution?
Hey now! If it isn’t everybody’s favorite fake old time lefty! I’m responding to you because it seems that, if I don’t, nobody will. I consider it my act of charity for an old liar who can’t seem to write a funny one line post to save his life. If it weren’t for me, how would you know your posts even show up on the board?
The Korean War, both retrospectively, in that we now know it prevented a whole-peninsula North Korea, and at the time, in that it was fought to prevent a whole-peninsula Maoist Chinese/Stalinist Soviet puppet.
The First World War, which, despite the desperate propaganda of the 1920s, did serve a purpose in preventing militaristic empires from spreading unchecked.
The War of 1812, which stopped the British from treating us like British Subjects In Denial. (They instead got to treat their Egyptian colonies as British Subjects In De Nile.)
The Civil War had a pretty high justification level too for the Union.
A) Save the Union
B) End the enslavement of fellow humans in the US.
Beats many of the others in fact. Sadly a large chunk of Americans were on the wrong side of that one.
Well done you.
Oh, stop it, you! I’ll give you just half an hour to cut that out!