Sorry, forced masturbation, naked pyramid stacking, etc. I’m not used to making the distinction with my military.
No you weren’t.
“Do you feel “ashamed” every time someone in an American uniform commits a murder, takes drugs, fails to pay his child support, etc.? I hope not. If you do, you’re just being silly. And if you don’t, the same applies to the miscreants in Iraq.”
Bolding mine.
I know it’ll be hard for you to not lie.
As I said above, I misrepresented the picture episode. The rape episode was text/verbal only. Your statement about not caring about the prisoner abuse was merely forcd masturbation, pyramid stacking, and other holly jolly games played by our brave soldiers, not to mention the murder and rapes that you discounted from the mainland troops.
Yep, what a fine and glorious America you represent O_o
Hyperbole is one thing, claiming I said I was unaffected by non-existent pictures of non-existent crimes is another entirely. And below you call me a liar! :rolleyes:
I said I didn’t feel ashamed of the U.S. because of the actions of the miscreants you for some reason saw fit to bold above. I do feel shame every time someone in the armed forces commits a crime of some sort. The country had nothing to do with it, so why should I? Like I said, I don’t feel shame every time a serviceman here (or abroad, for that matter) takes it upon himself to commit some sort of crime.
Man, one simply can’t make stuff this good up! It would be merely hilarious if it was said by one of our resident conservative posters, like Sam Stone or Dewey Cheatum Undhow who actually come up with some reasoned arguments and (at least occasionally) citations to support their positions! Coming from you, Milum, it is so far beyond hilarious that it is simply just bizarre. It is straying into The Broken Column territory!
OK, wait a tick. He said that you said that you were not affected by pictures that didn’t exist of crimes that never happened. So you mean to contradict this, yes? So you were affected by the non-existant pictures of the crimes that never happened?
Oh, wait…the pictures do exist but they are pictures of crimes that never…no, that won’t work either…
I am? Probably not, still trying to figure it out. If I ever do figure it out, I’ll probably be right, but now I’m just confused. Its like a Rubik’s Cube of existential phenomenology. Probably involves Heisenberg. Maybe. Not certain.
Well, Zarqawi, in his unending fight against free elections and an organized society, has deemed that the Iraqi Prime Minister should be on his growing list. What purpose does Zarqawi hope to accomplish by making this threat? I see none since the PM certainly isn’t going to ‘step down’ out of fear for his life because of this threat. In fact, it served as a means for the new Iraqi government to display brave leadership against the Zarqawi threats ------“We do not care about these threats, we will continue to rebuild Iraq and work for freedom, democracy, justice and peace. Iraqis have faced these threats before,” said a spokesman for Allawi. Are Zarqawi’s attempts becoming more desperate? Is this a sign that Zarqawi perceives himself as losing his influence in Iraq?
If you believe the intercepted Zarqawi Letter (linked and quoted from below), the threat against Iyad Allawi, the Iraqi Prime Minister, may be a sign of Zarqawi’s growing desperation rather than his growing influence. As June 30 comes and goes I think we can expect to hear more from people like Zarqawi ---- although he seems a little behind schedule. From that letter –
Well, what do you think, are the recent videotaped beheadings and the threats a sign that Zarqawi might be fighting the urge to ‘break camp?’ Or is Zarqawi just being Zarqawi and recent terror activity is par for the Zarqawi course?
What is this supposed to mean? How many times do you think such a thing (and worse) would happen should Iraq have turned out to have WMD and they fell into the hands of al-Qaeda? What do you think happened to children on board the planes that were hijacked. What do you think we should do…just fold up our table, pull all Westerners out of all Arab lands, engage in no commerce with Arab countries, keep all evidence of Western lifestyle off the televison and radio airwaves and Internet, do nothing to retaliate regardless of the provocation or what attacks may be visited upon us…because to do so is going to result in an innocent being harmed?
Is retaliation the goal or the “war on terror”? I think you hit the nail on the head when you said the magic word… which is: COMMERCE! Bush and the neocons Did want to invede Iraq. From the evidence I have seen, at least as far back as 1999. Click here:http: //www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm
A clip:
…In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.
We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration’s attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam’s regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council.
It’s from the Project for a New American Century. Do you recognise any of those (neocon) signatories below the letter?
back to you:
As horrible and reprehensible as it is, much more and worse would be the result of capitulation.
I don’t think capitulation is the right word. You are guilty of Bifurcation here which we all know is a logical phallicy. There are and were other options.
back to you:
(And, for the record, much worse could be and was going on under the Hussein regime. If you’re so concerned about things such as this photo represents, where is your delight in the fact that tens of thousands of Iraqis are no longer being subjected to torture; the torture of their children in front of their own eyes; dismemberment, etc., all of which were hallmarks of the Hussein regime? I know I’m damn glad of it! How about you?)
here you are making an appeal to emotion And bifucating. If I’m not with you I’m against you? If I don’t “delight” in the regime change going on, then I must, dare I say it, be evil or even (gasp) unpatriotic? I Always thought Hussien and his sons were bad news. There’s lots of bad news in the world but isn’t it funny how the bad news that gets in the news is connected with Commerce. Both oil and war profiteering in this case.
Well this has to be a dead thread by this point but I did have to reply, if belatedly, because I’m new to this stuff and to rebut.
I do feel bad and I am concerned, but this “They Are Bad We Are Good” stuff has been going on for milennia. I wish we could just grow out of it a little quicker.
Eric
