Geez! So sorry for my delayed response, but see, unlike you, I don’t carry a Treo between my legs – set on vibrate – for every time someone answers a post of mine on here.
I mean, imagine that, a whole fuckin’ thirteen and a half hours off of the SD.
:::faints:::
Know what though, just bustin’ your chops. You sem like a pretty level headed gal for someone whose politics are all messed-up.
Mince,
Just to add to GIGObuster’s response, when the info about the missiles came out, it also told of how minute the rules violation was – something to the tune of 20/30 miles IIRC. Hardly the stuff to “hit London in mere hours.”
Besides, as GIGO mentions, they were being destroyed!
Lastly, if you’d like to get into a quote war, I’ll be more than happy to ablige.
For starters, gotta love this one:
Looks like the man certainly knew what he spoke of.
I disagree with a lot of RedFury’s politics, but I’ve been thinking of starting a thread like this myself. There have been a lot of single issue threads about the Iraq War, but now that Bush is started his 3rd (I think) PR campaign to gussy it up, I think we’re due. I just shake my head at this completely unnecesary war. And I want to puke when I hear anyone say: We have to fight them there so we don’t have to fight them here. Something like 3,500 people died in Iraq in July. That’s more than died in the 9/11/01 terrorist attacks in the US, and that was just one month in this war-without-an-end. One month! How could so many otherwise intelligent people think it was a good idea to invade Iraq? How can that possibly be???
Wow. On A&E right now they’re replaying a documentary on Bill Riccio. His idiocy and reasoning remind me of Red Fury’s.
As a useless moron, am I allowed in the upper eschelon of your benevolent society, Red Fury? I could try to dumb it down if even that outshines your brilliance. :rolleyes:
Yeah. I do. You mean that you are tired of being reminded just how morally reprehensible the USA is for destroying a country, killing thousands of innocents, fomenting a civil war, and nurturing terrorism. To fucking bad. We are the bad guys here, and until those responsible own up to their horrible bad acts and make an attempt to correct them, you will continue to hear about it.
We should be ashamed to the depths of our brings. We should remind ourselves every day of that shame until we gather up the moral courage to admit our mistake, and pledge to do whatever it takes to make things right.
In all honesty, I’ve never been able to figure out just what your politics are. On the one hand, as far as I can recall, you were never gong-ho about this whole misadventure – quite the opposite in fact. But then you turn right around and become one of the most fervid Bush apologists on Board.
Best I can figure, is that I can’t figure Libertarians at all. You guys seem to be all over the place, often contradicting each other – never mind the rest of us.
Anyway, that being said, I appreciate your support vis-a-vis this thread. I never meant it to be a “joke” thread as many/most people are taking it, but rather a serious query as to why at this point in time there’s this damn stubbornness amongst Bush’s “True Believers,” a.k.a “Useful Idiots,” who absolutely refuse to face R-E-A-L-I-T-Y.
To wit:
Exactly. That’s what befuddles the hell out of me.
BTW, Red Fury, this may not be the correct forum to ask, but it’s something I’ve wondered for awhile.
What is your political philosophy? Do you identify with any political movements for the most part? In other words, if your nuts were in a vice and had to pick, what would be the closest philosophy you would identify with? What differences from that philosophy would you qualify?
Other than just finding things to hate, I’m not sure what exactly you support and defend? Is it just a matter of finding fault? Rather than finding things to support? I can’t imagine it’s the DNP, as they must provoke you as well, but a lack of Dem hatred has me confused.
So, can we clear it up and find out exactly what your core thinking is other than hating everything?
Yours is exactly the kind of post that makes me feel that there’s hope for America – and the rest of the world – yet.
Thank you.
duffer,
If it means anything to you, amongst the real political choices we have today, I tend to favor the Scandinavian countries’ model. Meaning a birth-given right to health-services, housing and education.
How far you go with those stipulations is strictly left to each individual. Many additional provisos I could add – such as limiting individual wealth to a “reasonable” amount to be debated – but as you said, not the time or the place to discuss my beliefs. I will add however, that I am mighty proud of what Zapatero has been doing for Spain.
As for your second post, sorry, me don’t speak gibberish.
I accept your misguided opinion of futbol due to your lack of exposure to same. Your loss. You’ll never have a chance to experience the joy I’ll feel when we beat, for instance, the snot out of Denmark in Euro Cup qualifying.
As for my Mom, I’ll never forget her lovely scent among many, many other things. She passed away January 20th after an agonizing seven month long bout with colon-cancer. Talk about feeling bitter.
Still, one out of two ain’t bad. You’re a good egg in spite of your – sometimes – cutting self, 'luc.
I think you would grant that the number people of killed during a month, or a year, in a war is a poor measuring stick to determine whether it was a good idea to go to war three years prior. There have been wars that have been much more costly in terms of human life that I don’t think you would consider unwise.
We can only judge the decision to go to war with the facts and intelligence that were available at the time. Where we got hung up is with the intelligence. It turns out important pieces of it were wrong. Such is the nature of intelligence. I don’t mean to be cavalier, but that’s the truth of it.
I was not an advocate of going to war with Iraq. To be honest, I wasn’t staunchly opposed to it either, I really didn’t know. I leaned toward waiting a little longer, hoping France would come around at the end and show Saddam the the world was unified against him, but they didn’t. And then it was a done deal. But I do think the there was a reasonable argument to be had for going to war eventually. Again, based on the the intelligence available at the time. We know some of it was wrong now, but no one knew it to be wrong then.
The whole discussion is moot now. Bush can’t run. Cheney isn’t running. What we need is to figure out an exit strategy that will not leave the Iraqis in the lurch. As to what that is, I don’t know.
Massaged intelligence, or intelligence from sources known to be unreliable at the time.
The world wasn’t unified against him. First, he wasn’t that important, except in America’s demented collective mind. Second, the world is never unified on anything, anyway.
Well, I knew. Guess that makes me some kind of super-genius . . . or maybe it was obvious at the time, and the pro war people were fools and scum.
None. It is the nature of modern America that we corrupt or destroy everything we touch, We have touched Iraq; it is corrupted, and being destroyed. We can’t do anything but make it worse; it’s in our nature as a culture.
But if we’re still saying it was a good idea to “fight them over there”, what we’re saying is we invited them in to Iraq in order to kill Iraqis so they won’t kill Americans. (Of course, most of those killed were not killed by foreign jihadists, they were killed by sectarian violence. But there have still been many, many Iraqis killed by these foreign jihadists.) I find that concept horrifying.
Not really. The question being posed is: how many still think it was a good idea? IOW, knowing what we know now, do you still think it was a good idea?
No, it’s not moot. Yes, we need to figure out what to do now in Iraq, but we should also make damn fucking sure we never make this type of mistake again.
I’m not sure what this means. If it means that given how things have turned out do you wish we could turn back the clock and not have gone? Sure. Absolutely. But is that reallysaying anything at all? Take football: 4th and goal on the one inch line. Your down five, ten seconds left. You call a quarterback sneak, they stop you. KNowing what you know about the outcome, was the play you called a good idea. Statistics would say absolutely. If you had a chance to replay the down would you run a different play. Well, if you knew the outcome, of course you would. But that’s just a lot of mental masturbation. The question that I think is pertinent is: if you had the exact same situation (without a time machine) would you make the same decision again? You make the best decision you can with the information you have. Sometimes you will be right, sometimes you will be wrong. I don’t think we’ve figured out a way around that one yet.
Yes. Hopefully we will have learned something from this debacle. But even if can avoid making this or similar mistakes, we will again make mistakes. And when the stakes are high the mistakes will be costly.
Good googley-moogley. He wasn’t talking about trailer trash. He was talking about internet enabled trailers. In his quest of saving everyone (and apparently everything) from itself, he’s pointing out the enabling of trailers. By the evil cable companies.
Enabling has been proven to be a detriment to society. And big corporations are a detriment. And anything the smells of business, media and corporations must all be bad.
Therefore, enabling internet access to a trailer is the ultimate insult to society.
Wonder what he would say about Katrina victims living in trailers accessing the Dope.
Probably not an issue. Cn’t bitch about them being against you, can you Red?
