Bring them back!
- Thread starter Kicking
- Start date
Noooo, KymarFye, noooo. Yer tripping. Can't prove rummy cheny are better or worst than himler, goehring.hitler
all the same crapRemember boy, remember rummy's words.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
All guilty
BOIL THEM 
We didnt respect the international community by going in in the first place why should we respect international law when we shouldnt the most....( when our soldiers are dying )....I agree looking back it may have not been wise to go in..but we are already there...we need to set order and bring our soldiers back...this will not be done thru compassion......
This statement is just stupid...to think it comes from a what i thought was a very intelligent individual.......
Saddam should have been contained in his little box.....To think that he was about to unleash havoc when in fact he didnt unleash it when his back was up against the wall is just ludicris.....
You please tell me what is the difference before the War and after he was gone....Do we feel any safer?? ..are our borders more secure??....nope..just ask the border patrol; they are understaffed and deal with mexican drug lords crossing the border at will....peace
So you think it's OK to 1)produce intelligence data that you suspected might be false to convince the American people that a war is justified; and 2) to profit financially from the war??
People are dying. Left and right. Innocent people. Innocent civilians and American soldiers. At our hands. My best friend from high school is over there now. I haven't heard from him since March.
The war is questionable, at best. In light of that, what is so shocking about what I wrote?
Granted, people dying is the worst part, but let's also bring in something else -- the deficit. It's growing.
Is it appropriate to waste approximately 25% of the total internal tax revenue paying off that deficit?? Do you have any idea how much the interest alone from the cost of the Iraq war is going to cost us in taxes?? We pay way too much in taxes already. In 1950 the rate was 2%.
Scary stuff! It would cost less to sponsor a small military force to police Saddam and leash him around like a little bitch. We didn't capture him and the country is in chaos. Nuclear facilities weren't even guarded. Riots and looting. Great! Same exact thing in Afghanistan. Total anarchy thanks to local warlords and again, we didn't get the one shithead martyr we came for. So yes, we broke up and destroyed most of the Taliban. Definitely a good thing. But there'll be more just like them. Especially since the country is in chaos. This is EXACTLY how OBL started his terror campaign -- the US came to help Afghanistan fight the Russians -- not because we gave a shit about Afghanistan, but because we were fighting Russia. When the cold war ended we left the country in chaos and the OBL era started. Let's not forget that OBL worked with our CIA. And now the cycle repeats itself, only ten years from now we'll have the former "Northern alliance" aka "the good guys" blowing up buildings instead of the Taliban. Unfuckinbelievable.
Are you happy that your personal freedoms have been limited by the Patriot Act? The purpose of government is to maximize personal freedoms by protecting them, not to limit personal freedoms in the name of protection. It's not just semantics.
Then again, people still loved Reagan/Bush's administration (they're all the same anyway) after the Iran-Contra scandal...thanks to shrewd marketing firms!! (Probably the same one the Bush regime hired to sell the Iraq war to the American people). And let's not forget about 'ol daddy Bush pardoning 5 indictees on his way out in '92, as if to say "fuck you" to the country for voting him out of the office. And his son now carries the torch of that "fuck you" as most of those people are in HIS cabinet now (good reading --http://www.dreamscape.com/morgana/reagan.htm ).
Look man, I am normally pretty complacent about the government --- but this one SUCKS.
That you would even bother to defend as sickening and pathetic a statement as the claim that the Bush Administration is worse than the Third Reich puts the idea of arguing with you about anything beneath consideration. No doubt there are several people here who agree with your individual arguments on various subjects. If I were one of those people, I would be saddened to have them voiced by you.
Pay a visit to a Holocaust memorial.
Noooo, KymarFye, Nooooo.!! Yer tripping again
Wasn't Bush family/ Rockefeller families/Fed doing business with hitler? selling arms tools, oil and financing????
How else would hitler have accomplished the killings? I'm losing faith in you
OK I guess this is your way of conceding the argument. So thanks for playing.
I would consider allowing the persecution of a religious minority -- in this case, the Taliban -- by allowing them to be PACKED inside sealed containers and left in the desert to die by heat, dehydration, and starvation -- to be similar in many ways to the crimes committed in the Holocaust.
Tell me how they're different..?
A decently educated ten-year-old shouldn't have too much difficulty making the argument.
"Class, write a paragraph explaining why an isolated incident in one war isn't the same as the Holocaust. Bonus points if you can describe the difference between World War II and the fighting in Afghanistan, or the difference between a to-tal-i-tar-i-an regime and a Republican government of the US."
If you can't figure it out for yourself, then you need to do some study and talk to someone with a grown-up outlook on the world.