This time it's London...

[dmc]

We tried for decades to put money into Iraq and all it did was increase Saddam's Swiss bank account.
That's because the money was being put in Saddam's Swiss bank account. By Bush Sr andumsfield, primarily. Where do you think he got all those nast WMDs?

Our soldiers are getting killed with weapons we sold Iraq...
We really F'd up Iraq... Now we are paying the price..

 

[ChileMass]

People want to come here for cash... Plain and simple.. They make their $$ here and send it back to where they came from...

Of course people come here for cash - how naive can you be - ??

Yeah, I understand that spritual well-being is ultimately more important than money, but honestly - that's only for those that have their basic needs already well-covered. It's hard to max out your spiritual side when you have no income and live in a poor country.

C'mon - you don't really believe that do you? That people like living in poor countries with lousy sanitation and no food and no education for their kids? How come people aren't lined up to become citizens of Tibet or India to go where the ideal environment for spiritual expression is at? Because they want to raise their families in America where they can sleep on a soft bed in a warm house and where food is cheap and plentiful.

Don't you guys appreciate living in America - ??

 

[Stephen]

Sorry if I offended you... Actually afte what you said about me yesterday..
I'm not...

I believe liberalism is treasonous and kills. I'm sorry if that offends you, but that is my viewpoint. Doesn't liberal tolerance dictate that our opinions have a right to exist... or is it only allowed if it agrees with the liberals? Some day dmc, you'll read beyond the editorial page of the New York Times, and share a rational non-emotional thought. Until then, this'll be my last response directly towards you, for fear of disgusting you, pissing you off, or whatever other emotional response you have to intellectual opinions that differ from your own.

In the meantime, getting back to the original topic:

Now, groups are threatening to attack Rome. I've come to the decision that it's presumptuous of us to think these attacks are about us, the U.S. I fear it's really part of the endgame of Islam's desire to wipe all non-believer's (aka infidels) from the face of the planet.

If this is not the case, where are the outcries from the Muslim leaders denouncing London's attacks? It's not there. Yes, Muslim leaders in the U.S. are speaking out (softly) against it... but they are here BECAUSE they are the moderate ones who can live in a civilized society with other religions.

Are the Muslims in Europe and Asia shouting in the streets, denouncing the attacks? No, they are shouting "Nuke, Nuke Washington! Bomb, bomb Pentagon!"

It's all part of an endgame folks. I don't see how we get out of it either. If I listen to one side, pulling out of Iraq emboldens them. If I listen to the other side, staying in Iraq aggravates them. Are we in a lesser of two evils situation? And which IS the lesser evil?

-Stephen

 

[ctenidae]

Don't you guys appreciate living in America - ??

Don't do that- it's cheap and silly.

Of course we all agree that America is the greatest place to be- otherwise we wouldn't be here. Just because I don't like the way the government has been behaving lately doesn't mean I hate America. That's a cheap Limbaugh-type ploy. In fact, one of the things I love most about America is that I can completely disagree with something that's going on, and say so, without fear of a jackboot stomping on my head.

Seriously, there's a parallel to be drawn between the general Conservative tactic of bashing anyone who disagrees, labeling them a "liberal" and telling them to get out of the country and Islamic fundamentalists stoning unbelievers, labeling them heretics, and killing them.

 

[dmc]

People want to come here for cash... Plain and simple.. They make their $$ here and send it back to where they came from...

Of course people come here for cash - how naive can you be - ??

Yeah, I understand that spritual well-being is ultimately more important than money, but honestly - that's only for those that have their basic needs already well-covered. It's hard to max out your spiritual side when you have no income and live in a poor country.

C'mon - you don't really believe that do you? That people like living in poor countries with lousy sanitation and no food and no education for their kids? How come people aren't lined up to become citizens of Tibet or India to go where the ideal environment for spiritual expression is at? Because they want to raise their families in America where they can sleep on a soft bed in a warm house and where food is cheap and plentiful.

Don't you guys appreciate living in America - ??

I personally love this country... No doubt...
Why would you ask such a question?

If I didn't love America - I wouldn't be defending what I believe in... I would just go somewhere else...

 

[ctenidae]

Are we in a lesser of two evils situation? And which IS the lesser evil?

Perhaps, and that's a pretty good question.

 

[dmc]

Until then, this'll be my last response directly towards you, for fear of disgusting you, pissing you off, or whatever other emotional response you have to intellectual opinions that differ from your own.

There is a god!!! WOOOHOOO!!!
No more accustaions of killing our soliers!!!
No more blasting my opinions while crying that I blast yours!!!

Still don't know why you don't sign up to go kill terrorists..

 

[dmc]

Are we in a lesser of two evils situation? And which IS the lesser evil?

Perhaps, and that's a pretty good question.

Thats for the person to decide... not someone else to tell them..

 

[dmc]

Seriously, there's a parallel to be drawn between the general Conservative tactic of bashing anyone who disagrees, labeling them a "liberal" and telling them to get out of the country and Islamic fundamentalists stoning unbelievers, labeling them heretics, and killing them.

Nice!!!

 

[ChileMass]

Don't you guys appreciate living in America - ??

Don't do that- it's cheap and silly.

Well I guess it was sort of a rhetorical question, but I do appreciate the response. You and dmc obviously have well-thought out and deeply-held positions, but I'm still confused at your suspicion of the government's actions if you have so much love for America and what it stands for.

Do you need the government, as your representative, to be perfect? It ain't gonna happen......

 

[JimG.]

I think Saddam's special punishment in Hell will be wearing damp tighty whities. Such an itch they give you!

Make that damp and tight tighty whiteys. Talk about a twist in your shorts.

 

[Stephen]

Seriously, there's a parallel to be drawn between the general Conservative tactic of bashing anyone who disagrees, labeling them a "liberal" and telling them to get out of the country and Islamic fundamentalists stoning unbelievers, labeling them heretics, and killing them.

Of course, the opposite is true when Liberals claim that Conservatives are mean-spirited, that they have to have been in the military before they can choose to send them to war or to even advocate the use of military force, and accuse them of reading off memos or drinking the "kool-aid" whenever they make a contrary point.

You have as much right to state your point as I have mine. As long as we're willing to agree on that. If we can't then we're all wasting our breath.

At the same time, the right to free speech doesn't in any way absolve us from the consequences of that speech. And our words have effects, from shouting fire to a crowded theatre to affecting the morale of soldiers and terrorists, even thousands of miles away in Iraq.

If it'll help people, call me a Conservative and we'll know what you imply by that. I'll gladly take the label.

It's liberals who can't admit what they are. :lol:

-Stephen

 

[dmc]

You and dmc obviously have well-thought out and deeply-held positions, but I'm still confused at your suspicion of the government's actions if you have so much love for America and what it stands for.

Do you need the government, as your representative, to be perfect? It ain't gonna happen......

No - but I'd like to feel that my Government isn't a big swaggering bully, force feeding our brand of Democracy down peoples throats...

For the first time in my life... I don't trust anything that comes out of the Whitehouse..

I won't feel comfortable until the pupet master, Karl Rove is gone...

 

[ctenidae]

I don't need the government to be perfect. Just not substandard. Perfect would be nice, but not likely.

I look at Reagan as a standard, of sorts. I didn't like a lot of his politics (well, more his economics, but that's another thread, entirely), but he was a guy you could get behind. I didn't like what he said, but by God, I liked that he said it. My entire problem with the current administration lies in the pre-invasion handling of things. The fact the administration lied multiple times, won't respond to questions about the handling on intelligence data, may have outed a CIA operative out of spite, didn't plan an exit strategy, etc etc etc, all bothers me greatly. That is not up to American standards, though it may be putting American standards through an American Standard (They make toilets. Sorry). The fact that no one seems to care, either that the story changed several times, or that BushCo won't answer questions about the change in reasoning really gets to me, and scares me. The railroading of the USA Patriot Act scares the bejesus out of me. These aren't instances of government not being perfect. These are examples of government running roughshod over the ideals and beliefs this country was built on.

 

[ctenidae]

Of course, the opposite is true when Liberals claim that Conservatives are mean-spirited, that they have to have been in the military before they can choose to send them to war or to even advocate the use of military force, and accuse them of reading off memos or drinking the "kool-aid" whenever they make a contrary point.

Gotta say, I see many more instances of COnservatives accusing Liberals of doing these things than I do of Liberals actually doing them.
As for having to have been in teh military to advocate the use of force, I think you'll find that the vast majority of "doves" have military experience, while the majority of hawks do not. There's a disconnect there, somewhere. Bush: Skipped out on service, rushed to war, re-elected for it. Powell: former Joint Chief of Staff, counseled restraint, run out on a rail for it. On teh reading off memos charge, watch teh talking heads sometime- you'll find that the rabid Conservatives (Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity) all use the same phraeology. Rumsfeld, Bush, Ridge, Cheney, all use the same phrases in their statements. Liberals, on the other hand, can't share a cogent thought between them. I don't think either thing is good.
On Kool-Aid- I'm not even real sure what this is supposed to reference- Thorazine in a psych ward or Jonestown? Depending on rabidity, I suppose it could pertain to either.

 

[dmc]

Powell: former Joint Chief of Staff, counseled restraint, run out on a rail for it.

Don't forget Bush Sr.... He actually warned his son about the problems with occupying Iraq...

But the "shrub" did not listen to his own dad...

 

[ChileMass]

I don't need the government to be perfect. Just not substandard. Perfect would be nice, but not likely.

I look at Reagan as a standard, of sorts. I didn't like a lot of his politics (well, more his economics, but that's another thread, entirely), but he was a guy you could get behind. I didn't like what he said, but by God, I liked that he said it. My entire problem with the current administration lies in the pre-invasion handling of things. The fact the administration lied multiple times, won't respond to questions about the handling on intelligence data, may have outed a CIA operative out of spite, didn't plan an exit strategy, etc etc etc, all bothers me greatly........

These aren't instances of government not being perfect. These are examples of government running roughshod over the ideals and beliefs this country was built on.

OK - you liked Reagan but hate W? I don't get it. They are so much the same except that W is a lousy actor by comparison.

I hated Reagan and still find it hard to look back and forgive him for some of the things that he did. I despised his gang of hard-liners back in the day (Meese, Haig, Regan, Cap Weinberg, etc). The parallels with your criticisms of W's administration are pretty evident.

I guess the difference is that back in the 80s I didn't have 2 nickels to rub together and now I have some things I want to protect. Back then, I thought the government would help me if I got in a jam, but 4 weeks after I voted for Reagan in 1984 (Mondale just had too much of that Carter-era loser aura still hanging on. I guess I hoped Ronnie would turn into a lame duck in his 2nd term.) the Republicans axed my Pell grant (70s-80s era college stipend) and I had to get a second job to get thru school. I hated Reagan after that. Plus, he was responsible for the rise of the religious right, who justifiably scare anyone not on their team.

I think you got hoodwinked by Ronnie's excellent PR team........

 

[Stephen]

Gotta say, I see many more instances of COnservatives accusing Liberals of doing these things than I do of Liberals actually doing them.

I suppose you have to be there to see it. Do a search for dmc on this site and you'll see the number of times he responds with these accusations to my posts rather than refuting anything I say.

As for having to have been in teh military to advocate the use of force, I think you'll find that the vast majority of "doves" have military experience, while the majority of hawks do not.

The generals not on the front lines, yes. But the guys I talk to returning from Iraq are all behind the presindent's policy 100%

There's a disconnect there, somewhere. Bush: Skipped out on service, rushed to war, re-elected for it. Powell: former Joint Chief of Staff, counseled restraint, run out on a rail for it.

And which war did Clinton serve in before he bombed Sudan and Bosnia... oh wait, he actually ran to Canada instead.

And I have some National Guard buddies who would take issue with them not considered to be "serving".

On teh reading off memos charge, watch teh talking heads sometime- you'll find that the rabid Conservatives (Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity) all use the same phraeology. Rumsfeld, Bush, Ridge, Cheney, all use the same phrases in their statements. Liberals, on the other hand, can't share a cogent thought between them. I don't think either thing is good.

Tell me if any of these words sound familiar? "Gravitas" "Quagmire" "Exit Strategy" "Rumsfeld resignation" "No WMDS" "Bush Lied" "Oil" "Idiot" "Selected, Not Elected". Our media is loaded with catch-phrases on both sides, and it's quite clear that both parties engage in pow-wowing about what they present and how they spin.

The difference for individuals like me is that I can give you the line of decisions that I have made that have led me to the conclusions I have, if you'll give me the time.

On Kool-Aid- I'm not even real sure what this is supposed to reference- Thorazine in a psych ward or Jonestown? Depending on rabidity, I suppose it could pertain to either.

It refers to Jonestown, and it's a derisive remark that indicates a bunch of people brainwashed into spewing out a doctrine. dmc even went as far as to post a photo of Bob Jones in response to my points.

It's odd that one person with an opinion is a "radical", two people are a "minority", three people are a "movement", but millions of people with the same opinion are "brainwashed".

-Stephen

 

[dmc]

OK - you liked Reagan but hate W? I don't get it. They are so much the same except that W is a lousy actor by comparison.

Best quote of the day!!!

Reagan was the first president I voted for.... Mainly cause I was convinced he would keep the Soviets from nuking me...

 

[JimG.]

Oh boy, back to the labels again, just when I thought we were making some progress here. I wouldn't live anywhere other than America, and I've visited many countries outside the U.S.. Nowhere else measures up.

I support my government because our current leaders were elected by a majority vote (whatever you might think about Florida in 2000). I'm suspicious of all politicians because a few, both democratic and republican, have done some really crappy things and lied to the public about it. I don't agree with the current administration's handling of the terrorist problem. There are things I do agree with, but not because I'm a conservative.

Stephen, I think saying that liberalism causes death and treason is over the top, but you're entitled to your opinion. Doesn't offend me because I'm not liberal, but it bothers me that it offends others. To be fair, dmc's comment about the special olympics was over the top too, but I know him personally and know he didn't mean it the way it sounded. Maybe that's part of the problem here; I don't know you personally, so the way I interpret what you say may not be how you actually mean it.

Unfortunately, none of this will help solve our current crisis regarding terrorism. What I can say is this: I will act to twart any terrorist if I can, and it won't matter to me whether they try to kill conservatives of liberals, French or Germans, Muslims or Christians.