So, I presume that anyone who supports the Dogface option also accepts that at least parts of Los Angeles should have been nuked after the riots a few years ago, when savage attacks against innocent people were displayed on national television. Salt the earth and all that.
Hey, you want to put words in someone else’s mouth, anyone can play that game. Here are some questions that arise in my mind, implied by your statement quoted above:
What terrorists? Why was the act of displaying the bodies worse than the act of killing them? Exactly how does the US occupation of Iraq combat terrorism? How do we know exactly the same people were responsible for both acts? Do you find it absolutely baffling that some Iraqis may strenuously object to the unrequested occupation of their country? Why must all Iraqi citizens be blamed and punished for the acts of a few, when it is not the usual practice in our own society? Why do you consider all Iraqi lives equally worthless?
My goodness! How could I forget child prostitution after the thread where I was, in fact, accused of being in favor of it! thank you for reminding me. Us people who disagree with the policies of the present American government are really the lowest of the low.
That is the most pathetic backtrack I have ever seen. Your own statements damn you, when taken in context. Don’t go running away crying, claiming to be misunderstood. You stated that you are rooting ‘for the little guy’. And when it comes to laying blame, how you can blame the US Gov’t for a bunch of savages killings some civilians and desecrating the corpses is beyond me. You may want to try blaming the actual fuckwads who commited the acts, but I doubt it.
Oh no! Bob! Doesn’t like me! Thinks I am a sick fuck! Thinks that his opinion is more than the whistling of the winter wind in a dead tree! I shall have to bloody kill myself now.
Could somebody please tell me where Sailor indicated a cavalier attitude to civilian casualties? I am not being sarcastic, I would really like to know.
El_Kabong, Look, it is not that hard. You are either with us or against us. You either unquestioningly support Bush 2.0 and swallow every steaming load that you craps out, or you are a terrorist or terrorist sympathizer. Hasn’t this been explained enough? You must have a 100% black and white view of the worlds in which Americans are the only true humans and all other groups are somehow sub-human (and thus, while regrettable, can be killed with only the mildest twinge of guilt). Above all, you must never ever even for one instant entertain any notions about what the Iraqis (you know, the bad guys) are thinking or what might be motivating them. Try to keep up, fella.
That would be a great comfort. I can only hope its true.
Towards American civilian casualties. Couple of dead contractors? Desecrating their corpses? Hey, its just ‘the little guy’ and his noble way of fighting back! :rolleyes:
Loved that whistling wind comment. But when did SeaHawk fans start useing “Bloody”? I thought that was an across the pond thing.
(former line backer at Redmond High (late 1980’s))
Well I do blame GWB but I never called him a “fuckwad”. But it that’s what you want to call him then ok, I blame the “fuckwad” who caused all this to happen, who ordered an unjustified attack on a foreign country which has cost thousands of lives, American and Iraqi. I blame the fuckwad in the White House. happy?
Grey, would please cite a single instance of weasles on meth? In case you have not noticed I am trying to improve my formerly frantic attitude. If I am civil, do you really need to toss criticism based on my past admittedly stupid statements?
Y’know, I’ve read this thread three times already, and I still can’t find where sailor allegedly supported the Iraqis who were bangin’ on the mutilated corpses.
In the words of right wing drug addicted freaks everywhere ( not to suggest I am one, or that I am against drugs. I am just against right wing assholes) I say “Ditto”
