Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Michael Tee

Pages: 1 ... 838 839 [840] 841
12586
3DHS / Re: Children fight troops in Iraq
« on: September 20, 2006, 10:25:53 PM »
<<If I lived in Iraq, I would be very happy that the United States and Britain liberated my country. I would work within the system of Iraq and within its government. >>

Obviously you are afraid to answer my question, which was put in the hypothetical.  IF . . . IF you wanted (rightly or wrongly and for whatever reason) to resist the foreigners who had invaded your country, and you lived in Iraq, WHERE would you fight them?  Alone in the desert, where they aren't, or in your biggest cities, where they are?  Similarly, where would they eat and sleep?  In the desert, miles away from the fighting, or in the midst of their own enemy-occupied cities, which may be free-fire zones to the Americans, but are HOME to the Resistance fighters?

You are afraid to give a straightforward answer to the question because there is no answer that doesn't expose the total absurdity of your contention that it is the Resistance fighters who are the cowards and the U.S. troops who are the heroes in this struggle.  Funny, but you managed to get it turned around 180 degrees.

It's actually outrageous that Americans whose troops lack both the guts and the decency to fight the Resistance man-to-man and so from pure cowardice rain white phosphorous, tank fire and bombs on civilian dwellings from a safe distance away, have the god-damn fucking gall to label the Resistance fighters and not the U.S. occupation forces as the "cowards" who are responsible for the deaths of women, children and old people in "combat" conditions. 

You can fool yourselves all you like with that bullshit, but believe me, the rest of the world knows the difference.

12587
3DHS / Re: Children fight troops in Iraq
« on: September 20, 2006, 10:10:32 PM »
I think the debate here got needlessly sidetracked into a discussion of MoveOn.org as if it had a lock on all liberal thinking on Afghanistan.  That's bullshit.  There were plenty of liberals who backed the invasion of Afghanistan at the time.  To focus this all on MoveOn is just diversionary sleight-of-hand tactics.  The Liberal government of Canada, which is considerably to the left of most mainstream U.S. "liberals," were able to support the idea.  Why don't you just take a liberal "roll call" and see which liberals, starting with Ted Kennedy and Hilary, supported the invasion at the time and which didn't?  I don't know which liberals DIDN'T support the invasion of Afghanistan, it seems to me that that would be the easiest way of demonstrating the fallacy of the allegation.

12588
3DHS / The Right Judge Will Get You the Right Result
« on: September 20, 2006, 03:17:22 PM »
Saddam Hussein's "genocide" trial which was drifting off course under a judge who couldn't or wouldn't provide opinions in the case sufficiently pleasing to the puppets and their US overseers, was given a sharp course correction when the Shi'ites responsible for running the administration of "justice" in the "Iraqi" government unceremoniously yanked the presiding judge off his bench and substituted a new guy who presumably has a better idea of what is expected from him.

Although you would have a hard time figuring that out from the headlines in the American on-line media. "New Judge Throws Saddam Out of Court," as if the real story concerned the unruliness of the defendant rather than the blatant, shameless rigging of the court system.

12589
3DHS / Tracking the Torture Taxi
« on: September 20, 2006, 02:50:48 PM »
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/onnesha-roychoudhuri/tracking-the-torture-tax_b_29864.html

Just a good account in the Huffington Post about how a vast network of secret prisons and torture chambers run by the "morally superior" (to what? a snake?) U.S. government was uncovered due to the vigilance and ingenuity of journalists and ordinary citizens of many countries working together. 

All I can say is, thank God that Bush and his cronies and the military and security types that do their dirty work are all so fucking DUMB!!! otherwise none of this information would ever have surfaced.

12590
3DHS / Re: Apparently, the Pope must die
« on: September 20, 2006, 02:14:14 PM »
<<I simply stated that ploacing blame up the food chain could be percieved as giving a pass to those who actually did the deed. >>

You can't really believe that.  According to your theory, convicting the husband who hired a hit-man to kill his wife is "giving a pass" to the hit-man?

Complete and utter nonsense.  Where do you get this stuff?  You'll say anything, no matter how absurd and ridiculous, in order to avoid facing the most elementary conclusions:  like the most vicious Islamic "terrorists," the U.S. government is equally guilty of the barbaric murders of priests and nuns, often accompanied by horrific torture.  In El Salvador.  In Nicaragua.  In Chile.  But you just want to keep that head of yours buried in the same old sand.

12591
3DHS / Re: Children fight troops in Iraq
« on: September 20, 2006, 01:34:29 AM »
<<The terrorists hide among the civilians so innocent lives will be lost if we go after them. The terrorists hide behind women and children.>>

Well, R.R., let me ask you:  if you lived in a small country the size of Iraq and foreigners invaded your homeland, occupied it and told you what kind of government you were going to have, if you decided to resist the occupation, where exactly would you live while you were doing your resistance work?  The occupiers aren't exactly out in the desert are they?  If the occupiers are in the city, you fight them in the city. 

It wasn't the resistance fighters who chose to make their city a battleground, it was the occupation forces.  The US forces are occupying Iraqi cities, the Iraqis don't occupy American cities.  THEY are the cowards, because they attack women and children in their hunt for the resistance fighters.  THEY are the cowards because they lack the balls to go after the resistance man-to-man.


<<As opposed to liberals who think that by not doing anything about the threats we face, particularly from Islamic extremists, will just make the problems go away. >>

The Islamic extremists who attacked your country did not come from Iraq.  They came from Saudi Arabia.  They trained in Afghanistan.  You are really confused.  They had nothing to do with Iraq or Saddam and Saddam and Iraq had nothing to do with them.

<<Saddam desired WMD. He was waiting for the sanctions to break down so he could restart his programs. >>

Saddam would never have dared to attack the US with nukes.  That's the craziest thing you could think of.  It would have meant instant anihilation.  Lots of countries desire nukes.  Lots of countries have nukes.  If desiring and/or having nukes is a deadly threat to the U.S., the whole country by now is as good as dead.  It's just not realistic  - - in fact, it's plain nuts - - to claim that because a certain dictator wants nukes, by that fact alone he is a mortal threat to the U.S.A.  The U.S. is a much stronger country than that.  They could never be threatened by Iraq.  That is absurd.  One hostile act by Iraq agaisnt the American homeland would be the total end of that country.

<<The Taliban was sheltering bin Laden. Some liberals didn’t want to remove that government from power. >>

Some did.  Lots did.  What are you talking about?  WHAT liberals did not want to remove the Taliban from power?  Are you trying to say that there were no liberals who supported the removal of the Taliban?  That's just not true.

12592
3DHS / Re: The Anti-U.S. Summit
« on: September 20, 2006, 01:18:51 AM »
Of course to the true conservative, if you are an enemy of Bush, you ARE an enemy of America.  [MT]

<<What constitutes as substantive debate from the hard left, these days >.  [sirs]
===========================================================

Actually, to the sane and normal, that constituted a snide little joke.  Pretty funny, too, IMHO.

Substantive debate COULD have been found in the point being made that the countries being castigated as "enemies of America" were actually VICTIMS of America in one way or another, and that whatever enmity they had for America was actually well-founded.  Unlike the enmity that America has for them.   

However, I don't think conservatives like sirs are really interested in substantive debate because they lose those almost every one they enter.  It's virtually a foregone conclusion.  Best to avoid the serious points being raised, which show up the total asininity of their crypto-fascist maunderings, and concentrate instead on the jokes.  The safer way.     

12593
3DHS / Re: Reporter asks hostile question about religion of Allen's mother
« on: September 20, 2006, 01:09:57 AM »
<<Yup, because as usual the liberal left overplayed their hand. The Webb campaign and liberals are now using Allen's mom as a political prop. I doubt it's going to go over well. >>

Don't you think it's the Allen camp that is milking the Jewish mother question for all it's worth, so that Allen can appear to be the victim of intolerance instead of the racist little shit that he really is?  And so that the whole "macaca" thing will fade away?

12594
3DHS / Re: Apparently, the Pope must die
« on: September 20, 2006, 01:06:30 AM »
<<Care to show us any modern versions of the inquisation?  Burning at the stake?  I thought not.>>

Well, the point of my post was that both religions are evolving but Christianity had a 600-year head start.  I thought I made it clear that Christianity seems to have gotten PAST where the Muslims are now.  They have passed THROUGH that stage of barbarism where the Muslims are currently at.  So I would not expect there to be any modern versions of the inquisition or burning at the stake in the (older) Christian religious world, although it would not be surprising to find them in the younger, still-catching-up, still-developing Muslim religious world.  From your questions, it is quite obvious that you did not get that point. 

As a matter of fact, the Christians do not have to go back 600 years to find their age of barbarism.  Three hundred years should be quite enough.  If you have the time, look up what the penalty for treason was under the laws of England three hundred years ago.  I bet even Bush and Cheney might find it a little extreme.

<<I can show you some modern versions of beheadings, the murdering of nuns, and riots in the streets. >>

Holy shit!  Never before in human history . . .

Two words for you, sirs:  "Grow up." 

12595
3DHS / Re: Children fight troops in Iraq
« on: September 20, 2006, 12:34:06 AM »
<<though this does not represent the majority attitude of Iraqis toward Americans. >>

LOL.  How would YOU know what the majority attitude of Iraqis toward Americans is?

<<They hide among civilians . . . >>

NEWS FLASH, R.R.  - - They LIVE there!!!  They're not "hiding among civilians," they're living in their own country with their own people.  Unlike some highly trained killers and torturers I could mention.

<<The terrorists don't give a damn about protecting innocent life.>>

ROTFLMFAO.  Unlike the U.S. army.  THEY give a JDAM.  But seriously, R.R., I'm very impressed that you show such concern for the protection of innocent life.  It's not every country that invades other countries so frequently and always with this great overarching concern for the protection of innocent human life.  It just shows what really good people you are.

12596
3DHS / Re: Reporter asks hostile question about religion of Allen's mother
« on: September 20, 2006, 12:23:06 AM »
Does this mean that Allen's "macaca" problems are now behind him?  (just askin)

12597
3DHS / Re: Iranian president takes on U.S at the UN
« on: September 20, 2006, 12:14:08 AM »
<<Ahmadinejad has challenged Bush to participate in a televised debate, an offer the White House has declined to accept.>>

Naturally.  Why debate the leader of another country, when there's always a fresh supply of 20-year-old morons ready to go over there and shoot it out with his Revolutionary Guards?

May I respectfully suggest to the Iranian President that if Bush ever works up the balls to debate him live on TV (AS IF!!!!!!) he should insist that both participants strip to the waist right at the start, so Bush can't wear a wire this time.

12598
3DHS / Re: The Anti-U.S. Summit
« on: September 19, 2006, 11:59:01 PM »
<<If the U.S. were the most non-interventionist nation in world history, greed, avarice and jealousy would still be directed against it.>>

LOL.  And if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.  The U.S. is NOT "the most non-interventionist nation in world history" now, is it?

The rest of the thread was hilarious, poor Katie Couric getting raked over the coals for deviating slightly from the party line - - failing to label the various pariah countries correctly as enemies of America, rather than merely enemies of Bush.  Of course to the true conservative, if you are an enemy of Bush, you ARE an enemy of America.

Let me see, are these countries REALLY "enemies of America?"  How could ANY country be an enemy of such a wise, benevolent and sweet-tempered country as America?  Cuba, for example, nursing memories of a 1961 invasion and living under an on-going economic blockade, could they REALLY be so childish and petulant as to become enemies of America over such trifles?  Or Iran, would anyone there really hold a grudge over all these years just because America overthrew their democratically elected government in the "50s and then encouraged Iraq to attack them with chemical weapons?  Would that really turn them into enemies of America?   Sheesh!   And Hugo Chavez - - just because the Bush administration sponsored a failed coup against him last year (or maybe the year before?) there's a CLASSIC case of a guy who, whatever reason he has to be peeved at the Bush administration, has no reason whatever to hate AMERICA.  It's not as if Bush represents the whole country, perish the thought.

No, I agree with you, Professor - - they're just a bunch of childish, petulant, greedy and shallow little piss-ants, who have no reason in the world to hate the great and good Unites States of America, except for their overweening jealousy and envy.  And the proof of it is:  everybody else LOVES the USA.  Just loves them.

12599
3DHS / Re: I hate forum software.
« on: September 18, 2006, 11:04:01 PM »
Cool

12600
3DHS / Re: common-sense variety of multiculturalism
« on: September 18, 2006, 11:00:09 PM »
I don't like any situation where a politician tells religious leaders what to say to their followers.  I  like it even less when the religion is a minority one and its practitioners are mostly members of a visible minority.  What's going to happen for example if they DON'T preach the government line?

And specifically with regard to the Muslims, they are between a rock and a hard place.  While the West is invading their homelands and killing tens of thousands, and has been robbing, exploiting and ripping them off for decades, they are expected to suddenly start denouncing Muslim extremist reaction to the crimes of the West?  Why not just denounce the crimes of the West since those are the crimes by which they as individuals are the most directly victimized?  If they in fact did as that Ozzie fascist ordered them to do, they'd lose all credibility with their own congregations and come across as sell-outs and cowards.  What self-respecting religious leader would want to put himself in that position?

I think the government - - any government - - should just stay the hell away from religion.  They have no business at all telling the churches or mosques what to preach.  I thought that kind of stuff went out with Nazi Germany.

Pages: 1 ... 838 839 [840] 841