[quote]Chushin wrote:
I don’t think you were around during the Iraq war… It was like the Wild West in here back then.
FWIW, I think that you and Beans have played important roles in changing things.[/quote]
I concur. I don’t agree with much of what smh posts but he is usually a consumate debater and has contributed a lot to PWI. Haven’t read as much of beans posts but he seems like a solid poster too. Glad to have them here.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
California alone has 35% of the entire country’s welfare, with only 12% of the population.
Whomever said that red states make up more of the tax takers is full of pure dog shit. [/quote]
Maximus,
If you look at what I posted I am talking about %'s of population, not gross numbers, the reality is that 8 of the 10 states with the highest % of non-payers went red in this election, I have linked the map for your enjoyment:
I’m not saying the non-payers didn’t vote for Obama (they may very well have) but they did not decide the election. 8 out of 10 of the states with the lowest % of non-payers voted for Obama so I’m not sure what the misunderstanding is.
pushharder,
I understand what you are saying with regards to Cali and Florida, what I am saying is just a little different, the highest % states versus the gross numbers, yes Cali had 37% that didn’t pay and since they have the highest population they also have the highest number of people that did not pay, that makes sense, but the states with the highest % of payers voted for Obama at an 80% clip so the 47% argument (which includes a lot of people that vote GOP anyway) doesn’t really hold water as an explanation of the election results.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Not to mention the fact that included in the 47% are the elderly living off SS (who account for an entire fifth of the group and who, by the way, voted for Romney), veterans, people who don’t qualify for income tax payment but do pay payroll taxes, and people making less than $20,000/year and therefore don’t qualify for any federal taxes.
It’s a bullshit statistic.[/quote]
Veterans? Don’t you mean active AND retired military?
[/quote]
*meant to type disabled veterans[/quote]
I think the whole 47% statement was dumb of Romney, but really I don’t beleive he meant to lump veterans and those living off social security (that worked their whole life) into that made up figure. Honestly, and I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt, but I think he was just venting and it blew up in his face.
You have to admit here is a portion of the country that are leeches and vote accordingly. Just like I have to admnit that same goes for those that are selfish and want to keep everything they earned or were given, and they vote accordingly.
[quote]undoredo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I’d say Pearl Harbor is the worst terror attack ever. …
[/quote]
Wasn’t Pearl Harbor an attack on a military target? Seems like an abuse of the English language to call it a terror attack, even if the attack was unjustified.
[/quote]
Not really. It was a military installation, but there was a civilian population there (I believe the base has been decommissioned, but I’m not sure). We were also not at war. If we had already entered WWII then I’d agree, but it was an unprovoked attack on U.S. soil. That’s a terror attack to me.
Not everyone agrees with me I’m sure, that’s just my stance.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]undoredo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I’d say Pearl Harbor is the worst terror attack ever. …
[/quote]
Wasn’t Pearl Harbor an attack on a military target? Seems like an abuse of the English language to call it a terror attack, even if the attack was unjustified.
[/quote]
Not really. It was a military installation, but there was a civilian population there (I believe the base has been decommissioned, but I’m not sure). We were also not at war. If we had already entered WWII then I’d agree, but it was an unprovoked attack on U.S. soil. That’s a terror attack to me.
Not everyone agrees with me I’m sure, that’s just my stance. [/quote]
Not a terror attack, as it wasn’t committed by terrorists, but an act of war. Provocation is up for interpretation.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
PWI has been a real pleasure to read these last few months… Lots of civil, knowledgable, reasonable folks here contributing.
Here’s hoping that it goes back to that now that all children have had their say.[/quote]
Really, I’m taking it as an invitation to return
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]undoredo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I’d say Pearl Harbor is the worst terror attack ever. …
[/quote]
Wasn’t Pearl Harbor an attack on a military target? Seems like an abuse of the English language to call it a terror attack, even if the attack was unjustified.
[/quote]
Not really. It was a military installation, but there was a civilian population there (I believe the base has been decommissioned, but I’m not sure). We were also not at war. If we had already entered WWII then I’d agree, but it was an unprovoked attack on U.S. soil. That’s a terror attack to me.
Not everyone agrees with me I’m sure, that’s just my stance. [/quote]
Not a terror attack, as it wasn’t committed by terrorists, but an act of war. Provocation is up for interpretation. [/quote]
I don’t agree, but it’s not that big a deal and it’s up for interpretation. To me the fact that we weren’t at war is why it’s an act of terror. I don’t think just because the nation of Japan committed the act doesn’t make it an act of terror. To me it was an act of terror as well as an act of war.
Edit:
The fact is a sneak act on U.S. soil occurred during a time of peace. It was not just a preemptive strike on American. I bet many people at the time saw it as an act of terror.
[quote]Grimlorn wrote:
Hell I was here 3-6 months ago and Zeb completely made something up, put it in quote bubbles with my name on it, and then posted that I said it and no one batted an eyelash at it when I said he made it up. Like that’s par for the course in an argument. [/quote]
Sniff, sniff Zeb made up something boo hoo"
You mean like that? Making fun of the fact that you’re a whiny little cry baby?
That’s funny you post here a half dozen times and one of them is lying about me making stuff up. Around here we actually have to prove stuff like that.
Soooo…go ahead prove it.
Or shut the fuck up.
Either way.
In a general sense it was an act of terror. Dropping atomic bombs on Japan were acts of terror as they were intended to create fear and encourage the Japanese to surrender. Today however, terror act commonly means an act committed by terrorists.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Grimlorn wrote:
Hell I was here 3-6 months ago and Zeb completely made something up, put it in quote bubbles with my name on it, and then posted that I said it and no one batted an eyelash at it when I said he made it up. Like that’s par for the course in an argument. [/quote]
Sniff, sniff Zeb made up something boo hoo"
You mean like that? Making fun of the fact that you’re a whiny little cry baby?
That’s funny you post here a half dozen times and one of them is lying about me making stuff up. Around here we actually have to prove stuff like that.
Soooo…go ahead prove it.
Or shut the fuck up.
Either way.
[/quote]I have not known you ever to do what this man accuses you of, but are you not capable of expressing it on a higher level than this?
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]undoredo wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I’d say Pearl Harbor is the worst terror attack ever. …
[/quote]
Wasn’t Pearl Harbor an attack on a military target? Seems like an abuse of the English language to call it a terror attack, even if the attack was unjustified.
[/quote]
Not really. It was a military installation, but there was a civilian population there (I believe the base has been decommissioned, but I’m not sure). We were also not at war. If we had already entered WWII then I’d agree, but it was an unprovoked attack on U.S. soil. That’s a terror attack to me.
Not everyone agrees with me I’m sure, that’s just my stance. [/quote]
Not a terror attack, as it wasn’t committed by terrorists, but an act of war. Provocation is up for interpretation. [/quote]
It was an act of terror. Leave it to the Marines to define these terms pogue. The Japanese government at the time was considered an extremist government and would be right along side the Il family except the Japanese had actual balls much like terrorists do (terrorists have huge sets of balls, anyone willing to literally put their life on the line for something does). The target wasn’t random, but neither were the twin towers and were taking part in a dogged style of warfare that resembles what might be defined as asymmetrical. In the end how it is defined is subjective, and I’m sure one can argue it wasn’t terror the same way they can argue David Duke was never a racist.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Grimlorn wrote:
Hell I was here 3-6 months ago and Zeb completely made something up, put it in quote bubbles with my name on it, and then posted that I said it and no one batted an eyelash at it when I said he made it up. Like that’s par for the course in an argument. [/quote]
Sniff, sniff Zeb made up something boo hoo"
You mean like that? Making fun of the fact that you’re a whiny little cry baby?
That’s funny you post here a half dozen times and one of them is lying about me making stuff up. Around here we actually have to prove stuff like that.
Soooo…go ahead prove it.
Or shut the fuck up.
Either way.
[/quote]I have not known you ever to do what this man accuses you of, but are you not capable of expressing it on a higher level than this?
[/quote]
No, sometimes I’m actually human and say a naughty word.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Grimlorn wrote:
Hell I was here 3-6 months ago and Zeb completely made something up, put it in quote bubbles with my name on it, and then posted that I said it and no one batted an eyelash at it when I said he made it up. Like that’s par for the course in an argument. [/quote]
Sniff, sniff Zeb made up something boo hoo"
You mean like that? Making fun of the fact that you’re a whiny little cry baby?
That’s funny you post here a half dozen times and one of them is lying about me making stuff up. Around here we actually have to prove stuff like that.
Soooo…go ahead prove it.
Or shut the fuck up.
Either way.
[/quote]I have not known you ever to do what this man accuses you of, but are you not capable of expressing it on a higher level than this?
[/quote]
he probably hasn’t had his coffee yet…
[quote]StevenF wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Grimlorn wrote:
Hell I was here 3-6 months ago and Zeb completely made something up, put it in quote bubbles with my name on it, and then posted that I said it and no one batted an eyelash at it when I said he made it up. Like that’s par for the course in an argument. [/quote]
Sniff, sniff Zeb made up something boo hoo"
You mean like that? Making fun of the fact that you’re a whiny little cry baby?
That’s funny you post here a half dozen times and one of them is lying about me making stuff up. Around here we actually have to prove stuff like that.
Soooo…go ahead prove it.
Or shut the fuck up.
Either way.
[/quote]I have not known you ever to do what this man accuses you of, but are you not capable of expressing it on a higher level than this?
[/quote]
he probably hasn’t had his coffee yet…
[/quote]
Actually, my wife keeps me away from the coffee as she recognized my natural high many years ago.
Okay…I’m sorry Tirib and promise to do better.
Do I have to say penance?
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
In a general sense it was an act of terror. Dropping atomic bombs on Japan were acts of terror as they were intended to create fear and encourage the Japanese to surrender. Today however, terror act commonly means an act committed by terrorists. [/quote]
I don’t believe being a nation and a terrorist are mutually exclusive. I would argue the U.S. did not commit an act of terror because the Japanese were warned and the two nations were in the middle of a war. I mean when we took Okinawa, was that an act of terror?
I think the term terrorist isn’t used correctly. Like I said you can be a part of the UN and still commit an act of terror. It just so happens we try not to where as certain groups use terror as their main weapon. They have to because they lack the intimidation factor of a large military or nuclear arsenal.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
No, sometimes I’m actually human and say a naughty word.
[/quote]
Could you at least do it like a man instead of a middle school kid?
Lol
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
No, sometimes I’m actually human and say a naughty word.
[/quote]
Could you at least do it like a man instead of a middle school kid?
Lol[/quote]
Sorry, I will try harder to be more profane in a manly way.
LOL
Thanks for the kind words from those that gave them.