Republican Jewish Coalition Bars Ron Paul From Debate: ‘He’s misguided and extreme’

Quote from Trader666:

"Glad you made it out alive" is nice but it should have been followed by an apology. Of course if you had the character to do that, you wouldn't have fabricated the chickenhawk bullshit and then hypocritically failed to prove your own ASSertion, to begin with.
More...

That really doesn't address the points I made in my last post. Sorry if I hurt your feelings though. If you are being truthful about your experience than you are in a slightly better position to suggest others should go off and fight so they can come back with issues they don't wish to discuss.

However, you're still wrong, our foreign policy is still flawed, and most importantly, we can no longer afford it...as evidenced by our 15 trillion dollars in debt. Further, you've all but admitted that you would do the exact same thing a so called terrorist would if another nations military killed your entire family (by accident of course). Yet you continue to pretend that you don't get how our foreign policy creates terrorists. Are you being purposefully obtuse?
 
Quote from Lucrum:

I'd still do my basic training in something with older "steam gauges" and no GPS.
More...

Oh man.

If you do your training in a ship with no GPS (assuming it has an ADF) you are going to have to learn NDB approaches during instrument training.

I did not like NDB approaches. :)

The only good thing was you can pick up the ball game on the ADF lol.
 
Speaking of being wrong you're not man enough to admit when you are... and just because you say or "think" something doesn't make it so. You blame America for 9/11 and make excuses for Islamofascists... maybe you and rew should go on an apology tour and ask them what our foreign policy should be; you insist on proof that al-Awlaki's an enemy combatant, yet make up and push a lie that I'm a chickenhawk based on nothing (are YOU a combat veteran BTW?); for all your talk of being a Marine you hold childishly naive and ignorant ideas about nuclear weapons; etc., etc. In short, you're a rock-headed internet braggart who lacks integrity and doesn't even know what he doesn't know.
Quote from DAS Trader:

That really doesn't address the points I made in my last post. Sorry if I hurt your feelings though. If you are being truthful about your experience than you are in a slightly better position to suggest others should go off and fight so they can come back with issues they don't wish to discuss.

However, you're still wrong, our foreign policy is still flawed, and most importantly, we can no longer afford it...as evidenced by our 15 trillion dollars in debt. Further, you've all but admitted that you would do the exact same thing a so called terrorist would if another nations military killed your entire family (by accident of course). Yet you continue to pretend that you don't get how our foreign policy creates terrorists. Are you being purposefully obtuse?
More...
 
Quote from Trader666:

Speaking of being wrong you're not man enough to admit when you are... and just because you say or "think" something doesn't make it so. You blame America for 9/11 and make excuses for Islamofascists... maybe you and rew should go on an apology tour and ask them what our foreign policy should be; you insist on proof that al-Awlaki's an enemy combatant, yet make up and push a lie that I'm a chickenhawk based on nothing (are YOU a combat veteran BTW?); for all your talk of being a Marine you hold childishly naive and ignorant ideas about nuclear weapons; etc., etc. In short, you're a rock-headed internet braggart who lacks integrity and doesn't even know what he doesn't know.
More...

Nothing of substance and nothing to counter my points. I and several others have gone to great lengths to explain how our foreign policy creates terrorists. That's not apologizing for them any more than saying gravity causes things to fall.

I never asked for proof Awlaki was an enemy combatant....that moniker requires no proof. All it takes is Dear Leader's word and poof, you're an enemy combatant. That's the problem. I asked for proof he was waging war against the United States and his actions merited a death sentence. Moreover, I asked why the killing was done extra judicially...since...as you say...all this evidence exists.

Also, I'm pretty sure I said the following words "sorry if I hurt your feelings", in response to you suggesting I should have apologized. Rather than accept that apology you are on some sort of angry tirade...go ahead man...vent away.

Finally, I won't ask you to apologize for calling me this or that, because unlike you, I am not so fragile as to require an apology from a random person on the internet. Your insults mean absolutely nothing to me, so please, continue, because you sure as hell aren't winning the argument. You know who is winning the argument though? Ron Paul...he has all but erased Newt's lead in Iowa and has picked up points in NH. Trump had to back out of the debate (lol). We may just turn this thing around before its too late.
 
Nonsense. There's been plenty of substance that you've either ignored or are too stupid and jaded to grasp.

And spare me your mincing of words on enemy combatants... it's a lot more than a moniker and you're certainly not one to talk about proof given your bullshit here. Are you claiming Al-Qaeda's not at war with us? Or that al-Awlaki was not an active member of Al-Qaeda?

Are you really so deluded that you "think" you hurt my feelings? I'm actually glad you didn't apologize because, as I said, it makes me happy when you diminish yourself. I brought it up to further point out what a classless piece of shit you are. Calling someone stupid or ignorant is one thing... pulling baseless and repeated "chickenhawk" accusations out of your ass in a desperate atttempt to smear someone whose past you know nothing about is on an entirely different level... especially if that person's a combat veteran and you claim to have served. I thought anyone who's worn the uniform would know that.
Quote from DAS Trader:

Nothing of substance and nothing to counter my points. I and several others have gone to great lengths to explain how our foreign policy creates terrorists. That's not apologizing for them any more than saying gravity causes things to fall.

I never asked for proof Awlaki was an enemy combatant....that moniker requires no proof. All it takes is Dear Leader's word and poof, you're an enemy combatant. That's the problem. I asked for proof he was waging war against the United States and his actions merited a death sentence. Moreover, I asked why the killing was done extra judicially...since...as you say...all this evidence exists.

Also, I'm pretty sure I said the following words "sorry if I hurt your feelings", in response to you suggesting I should have apologized. Rather than accept that apology you are on some sort of angry tirade...go ahead man...vent away.

Finally, I won't ask you to apologize for calling me this or that, because unlike you, I am not so fragile as to require an apology from a random person on the internet. Your insults mean absolutely nothing to me, so please, continue, because you sure as hell aren't winning the argument. You know who is winning the argument though? Ron Paul...he has all but erased Newt's lead in Iowa and has picked up points in NH. Trump had to back out of the debate (lol). We may just turn this thing around before its too late.
More...
 
Quote from Trader666:

Are you claiming Al-Qaeda's not at war with us? Or that al-Awlaki was not an active member of Al-Qaeda?

More...

So you admit Anwar Al-Awlaki was member of Al Queda?

al-Awlaki dined at the Pentagon months after 9/11.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/5mT5M5_pmPI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


EXCLUSIVE: Al Qaeda Leader Dined at the Pentagon Just Months After 9/11
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/10/20/al-qaeda-terror-leader-dined-pentagon-months/#ixzz1gU5WmY61

Dining with the enemy: Al Qaeda leader linked to 9/11 hijackers 'was invited to the Pentagon for lunch after attacks'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...entagon-lunch-9-11-attacks.html#ixzz1gU5eWyQR
 
A combat veteran has been called a "chickenhawk". I did warn that something like that would happen.

Unfortunate and unnecessary. An apology is owed and one that does not contain the word "if".
 
Quote from 377OHMS:

A combat veteran has been called a "chickenhawk". I did warn that something like that would happen.

Unfortunate and unnecessary. An apology is owed and one that does not contain the word "if".
More...

Actually, he simply states that he was at Sill and went on the the 1st Cav. I thought he was the Marine and did not bother to challenge his story.

But........

Actually, he has given no specifics as to his designation, rank, MOS, theater of service, nothing really.

He is simply stating something and giving no details. His post was the most vague of everyone's on here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top