Thank You, President Clinton!

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]Applesauce wrote:
doogie wrote:
vroom wrote:
This is all just distractionary from the current inability to make any progress…

Unlike accusing people of “swallowing spin” instead of addressing the facts, or making up words so you look cute instead of ignorant?

Spin is fact, only it omits smaller facts to support it’s claim.

I don’t know the entire story of Clinton and N. Korea, but I know that objective journalists don’t refer to N. Korea as “The Savages”, they refer to them as … NORTH KOREA. Coultier is an educated right-wing spin doctor, just as Bill Maher is for the left. At least Bill Maher is funny sometimes.
[/quote]

For the record…Bill Maher is a pot head libertarian.

Bill Maher used to date Coulter and still bangs her from time to time.

Coutler is analogous to Michael Moore not Bill Maher. Bill Maher makes fun of both parties. It is just easier to prey on the party in charge when they F up so much.

42

[quote]The_Rabbi wrote:
Foolish. You want to get yourself some peace and leave it for your grandchildren to fight out the consequences. Well, not I.[/quote]

Bullshit. I want people to THINK before they run into war. I want people to look at our resources and stop being so gung ho to either police the entire planet or send more of own men to die at every given opportunity. If all of our resources weren’t tied up in Iraq, I would be more for action here.

It is hard to read quite this much crap in only one post. I am military. I’m not selling this country out by thinking of the consequences. Fail in Iraq? Iraq is a long term project that we are now tied to for decades to come. We went in with no solid plan of rebuilding the infrastructure. It was as if no one even considered it until we were chin deep in it. People like you would have us do the same everywhere until we thin ourselves out.

We do not want to keep starting wars until we leave ourselves vulnerable.

43

[quote]Dr. Stig wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Dr. Stig wrote:
The UK sold arms to Iraq, loads of them, the SAS trained Bin Laden’s mates etc etc.

The French sold the Argentinians weapons they used in the Falklands against the UK.

oh, and Best Buy or whatever its called sold all you internet war mongerers PC’s which is a more serious crime.

To even jokingly compare selling weapons to buying computers is an even more serious crime.

What’d you expect when you signed on to a Politics forum? Jokes such as: my mother is Welsh and my father is Hungarian…so, I’m well-hung.

Go take a pill, Junior, and lie down.

HH

Sorry Grandad.[/quote]

Leave HH alone…the old fella farts dust from the 1600s.

44

[quote]The_Rabbi wrote:
Coulter is moron, but she’s also telling the truth. We tried to make deals with NK in the past, and it hasn’t resulted in jack shit. They’re still acting like bastard commies.

Sanctions don’t do anything to a dictatorial regime when the dictator doesn’t care about whether or not his people starve to death.[/quote]

You’d better get on the phone with Bush then, because he’s looking for non-military ways to deal with NK as well.

45

Wow, sorry… when I wrote this I was implying a tone of complete sarcasm in every regard, but instead accidently ended up with the commonly used mantra.
Cheers.

[quote]sactown1 wrote:
metalsluggx wrote:
If we don’t start declaring more war on third world countries people will start to die you loon, because of terrorism and how quickly it spreads during peacetime.

Wow I don’t even know why we bother replying to you liberals, you guys disagree with us because you are all obviously out of touch with reality, because President George W. Bush is reality.

He has a strong backbone and he is also very religious, he said so. We have a country to defend from people that actually use UNLAWFUL violence against OTHER people, don’t you know how TERRIBLE that is?
IT’S TERRORISM YOU LIBERALS!
IT’S A ‘NEW GAME’!

We must use LAWFUL violence, i.e. dropping bombs on buildings that probably have terrorists in them who delight in strapping bombs to themselves and commiting acts of UNLAWFUL violence because they are cowards who hate democracy and won’t stop killing people! VIVA LA BUSH!

What in the fuck does North Korea have to do with terrorism being committed against the US?

[/quote]

46

[quote]Professor X wrote:

We do not want to wait until our enemies become any more powerful. What sense does that make?

We do not want to keep starting wars until we leave ourselves vulnerable. [/quote]

Overstretching the military, going into massive debt because of wars, invoking policies that cause foreign peoples to despise them…

This book has been written before many times by other empires. It’s a shame no one reads anymore.

47

So the plan is to take out Kim and his goons and the people will rejoice and hail us as saviours?

Someone remind me where I have heard that line before…oh…wait…

48

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
“It wasn’t that difficult. Clinton gave the North Koreans $4 billion to construct nuclear reactors in return for the savages promising not to use the reactors to build bombs. But oddly, despite this masterful triumph of “diplomacy,” the savages did not respond with good behavior. Instead, they immediately set to work feverishly building nuclear weapons.”

         ---- Ann Coulter
             July 19th column

[/quote]

I have a better question. What do you have to say about the offer to Iran that has Bush’s backing that includes light water reactors? It amounts to the same thing Clinton offered the Koreans.

49

[quote]danmaftei wrote:
But there are universal standards of living that all human rights should have access to.

[/quote]

This is why liberalism must use force. What if I don’t WANT to provide someone else with a certain standard of living? A truly compassionate government would then try to CONVINCE me that it is in my interest to help the poor. Instead, they mouth slogans, get enough idiots to vote them into office, then point a gun at me and force me to pay.

What if I don’t? What if many like me decide to no longer cooperate where a gun is an argument?

You see, the liberal scheme cannot work. It must, by its own logic, become a dictatorship. And I’m compassionate enough to say that when you’ll scream ‘But I didn’t know it!’, you will not be forgiven. (Thanks Ayn!)

HH

50

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
danmaftei wrote:
But there are universal standards of living that all human rights should have access to.

This is why liberalism must use force. What if I don’t WANT to provide someone else with a certain standard of living? A truly compassionate government would then try to CONVINCE me that it is in my interest to help the poor. Instead, they mouth slogans, get enough idiots to vote them into office, then point a gun at me and force me to pay.

What if I don’t? What if many like me decide to no longer cooperate where a gun is an argument?

You see, the liberal scheme cannot work. It must, by its own logic, become a dictatorship. And I’m compassionate enough to say that when you’ll scream ‘But I didn’t know it!’, you will not be forgiven. (Thanks Ayn!)

HH

[/quote]

Who’s forcing you to pay? Are you saying taxes are bad? Are you saying if you get shot in the face and you somehow survive but you have no “I got shot in the face” insurance you don’t want anyone to help you out?

If you think it’s tyrannical to provide those basic rights I mentioned to everyone in your nation through taxes, then get the fuck out of the US, off the planet, and go swallow a vacuum on Mars.

51

[quote]danmaftei wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
danmaftei wrote:
But there are universal standards of living that all human rights should have access to.

This is why liberalism must use force. What if I don’t WANT to provide someone else with a certain standard of living? A truly compassionate government would then try to CONVINCE me that it is in my interest to help the poor. Instead, they mouth slogans, get enough idiots to vote them into office, then point a gun at me and force me to pay.

What if I don’t? What if many like me decide to no longer cooperate where a gun is an argument?

You see, the liberal scheme cannot work. It must, by its own logic, become a dictatorship. And I’m compassionate enough to say that when you’ll scream ‘But I didn’t know it!’, you will not be forgiven. (Thanks Ayn!)

HH

Who’s forcing you to pay? Are you saying taxes are bad? Are you saying if you get shot in the face and you somehow survive but you have no “I got shot in the face” insurance you don’t want anyone to help you out?

If you think it’s tyrannical to provide those basic rights I mentioned to everyone in your nation through taxes, then get the fuck out of the US, off the planet, and go swallow a vacuum on Mars.[/quote]

Uh-oh, I think a liberal is starting to actually THINK. What I’ve been saying is causing him to feel uncomfortable with his world view and he’s lashing out at me.

Good. If lashing out at me means you also think, then go ahead…

…and careful what YOU swallow.

HH

52

Liberals tell you what to do with your money.

Conservatives tell you what to do with your private life.

Both suck big @$$ elephant d!cks!!!

53

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
danmaftei wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
danmaftei wrote:
But there are universal standards of living that all human rights should have access to.

This is why liberalism must use force. What if I don’t WANT to provide someone else with a certain standard of living? A truly compassionate government would then try to CONVINCE me that it is in my interest to help the poor. Instead, they mouth slogans, get enough idiots to vote them into office, then point a gun at me and force me to pay.

What if I don’t? What if many like me decide to no longer cooperate where a gun is an argument?

You see, the liberal scheme cannot work. It must, by its own logic, become a dictatorship. And I’m compassionate enough to say that when you’ll scream ‘But I didn’t know it!’, you will not be forgiven. (Thanks Ayn!)

HH

Who’s forcing you to pay? Are you saying taxes are bad? Are you saying if you get shot in the face and you somehow survive but you have no “I got shot in the face” insurance you don’t want anyone to help you out?

If you think it’s tyrannical to provide those basic rights I mentioned to everyone in your nation through taxes, then get the fuck out of the US, off the planet, and go swallow a vacuum on Mars.

Uh-oh, I think a liberal is starting to actually THINK. What I’ve been saying is causing him to feel uncomfortable with his world view and he’s lashing out at me.

Good. If lashing out at me means you also think, then go ahead…

…and careful what YOU swallow.

HH

[/quote]

You still didn’t answer my questions. Nor did I feel threatened by what you said. Granted, it did make me think, but it didn’t make me change my mind on what liberalism is. I merely got riled up. So go ahead and answer my questions, don’t avoid them.

54

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
What if I don’t WANT to provide someone else with a certain standard of living?[/quote]

Let’s say you get your wish and a new “taxes are optional” system is put in place.

Suddenly, almost no funds are available for welfare and the masses of poor people, which largely outnumber the rich, discover that they’ll have to take by force what they need to subsist.

Now, do you prefer the government’s “gun” (generally in the form of laws, penalties, jail time, etc.) or an actual, real gun held by some angry, hungry guy who has to feed his family of 6?

Or am I missing some part of your imagined Utopia?

55

[quote]pookie wrote:
Now, do you prefer the government’s “gun” (generally in the form of laws, penalties, jail time, etc.) or an actual, real gun held by some angry, hungry guy who has to feed his family of 6?

Or am I missing some part of your imagined Utopia?[/quote]

Yes, the part of the fascist police-state that keeps the angry, hungry guys under lockup. :wink:

56

[quote]Professor X wrote:
The_Rabbi wrote:
Foolish. You want to get yourself some peace and leave it for your grandchildren to fight out the consequences. Well, not I.

Bullshit. I want people to THINK before they run into war. I want people to look at our resources and stop being so gung ho to either police the entire planet or send more of own men to die at every given opportunity. If all of our resources weren’t tied up in Iraq, I would be more for action here.

You’re willing to sell out the United States and our prosperity to avoid facing an enemy? Make no mistake, if we fail in Iraq and fail to deal with our other enemies, it is over for us as a superpower. Maybe this is what you want, but I don’t want my descendents to have to live in a place anything like Europe. If that means I have to go to Korea, so be it.

It is hard to read quite this much crap in only one post. I am military. I’m not selling this country out by thinking of the consequences. Fail in Iraq? Iraq is a long term project that we are now tied to for decades to come. We went in with no solid plan of rebuilding the infrastructure. It was as if no one even considered it until we were chin deep in it. People like you would have us do the same everywhere until we thin ourselves out.

At any rate, all we need to do is get rid of Kim and his lackeys.

That’s all? Sounds easy.

We do not want to wait until our enemies become any more powerful. What sense does that make?

We do not want to keep starting wars until we leave ourselves vulnerable. [/quote]

Are you sure that ALL of our resources are tied up in Iraq???
Thats a mouthful!! think before you type.
I am military too, USAF Captain.

57

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
“It wasn’t that difficult. Clinton gave the North Koreans $4 billion to construct nuclear reactors in return for the savages promising not to use the reactors to build bombs. But oddly, despite this masterful triumph of “diplomacy,” the savages did not respond with good behavior. Instead, they immediately set to work feverishly building nuclear weapons.”

         ---- Ann Coulter
             July 19th column

[/quote]

So? Pretty much every “enemy” the western world is currently fighting and has fought, our leaders have been in bed with at one point or another. It?s not just the democrats or just the republicans, you know.

58

[quote]PtrDR wrote:
Professor X wrote:
The_Rabbi wrote:
Foolish. You want to get yourself some peace and leave it for your grandchildren to fight out the consequences. Well, not I.

Bullshit. I want people to THINK before they run into war. I want people to look at our resources and stop being so gung ho to either police the entire planet or send more of own men to die at every given opportunity. If all of our resources weren’t tied up in Iraq, I would be more for action here.

You’re willing to sell out the United States and our prosperity to avoid facing an enemy? Make no mistake, if we fail in Iraq and fail to deal with our other enemies, it is over for us as a superpower. Maybe this is what you want, but I don’t want my descendents to have to live in a place anything like Europe. If that means I have to go to Korea, so be it.

It is hard to read quite this much crap in only one post. I am military. I’m not selling this country out by thinking of the consequences. Fail in Iraq? Iraq is a long term project that we are now tied to for decades to come. We went in with no solid plan of rebuilding the infrastructure. It was as if no one even considered it until we were chin deep in it. People like you would have us do the same everywhere until we thin ourselves out.

At any rate, all we need to do is get rid of Kim and his lackeys.

That’s all? Sounds easy.

We do not want to wait until our enemies become any more powerful. What sense does that make?

We do not want to keep starting wars until we leave ourselves vulnerable.

Are you sure that ALL of our resources are tied up in Iraq???
Thats a mouthful!! think before you type.
I am military too, USAF Captain.

[/quote]

Then maybe you should think before you type. I have mentioned openly on this forum humanitarian missions I have been on that will NEVER get media coverage. I understand that not every man is in Iraq, especially since I’m not. Do my words have to be so literal that I have to count every man and woman specifically in Iraq right now for you to understand what was written? Unless you are about to pretend as if Iraq is simply a minor blip on the screen as far as our resources, then what was your point here? To tell me your rank?

59

[quote]hspder wrote:
Yes, the part of the fascist police-state that keeps the angry, hungry guys under lockup. ;-)[/quote]

Well, to keep that many poor people under lockup is going to cost a lot of money. Can’t have that with no taxes.

I’m sure HH has a better, more final solution.

60

[quote]Professor X wrote:
PtrDR wrote:
Professor X wrote:
The_Rabbi wrote:
Foolish. You want to get yourself some peace and leave it for your grandchildren to fight out the consequences. Well, not I.

Bullshit. I want people to THINK before they run into war. I want people to look at our resources and stop being so gung ho to either police the entire planet or send more of own men to die at every given opportunity. If all of our resources weren’t tied up in Iraq, I would be more for action here.

You’re willing to sell out the United States and our prosperity to avoid facing an enemy? Make no mistake, if we fail in Iraq and fail to deal with our other enemies, it is over for us as a superpower. Maybe this is what you want, but I don’t want my descendents to have to live in a place anything like Europe. If that means I have to go to Korea, so be it.

It is hard to read quite this much crap in only one post. I am military. I’m not selling this country out by thinking of the consequences. Fail in Iraq? Iraq is a long term project that we are now tied to for decades to come. We went in with no solid plan of rebuilding the infrastructure. It was as if no one even considered it until we were chin deep in it. People like you would have us do the same everywhere until we thin ourselves out.

At any rate, all we need to do is get rid of Kim and his lackeys.

That’s all? Sounds easy.

We do not want to wait until our enemies become any more powerful. What sense does that make?

We do not want to keep starting wars until we leave ourselves vulnerable.

Are you sure that ALL of our resources are tied up in Iraq???
Thats a mouthful!! think before you type.
I am military too, USAF Captain.

Then maybe you should think before you type. I have mentioned openly on this forum humanitarian missions I have been on that will NEVER get media coverage. I understand that not every man is in Iraq, especially since I’m not. Do my words have to be so literal that I have to count every man and woman specifically in Iraq right now for you to understand what was written? Unless you are about to pretend as if Iraq is simply a minor blip on the screen as far as our resources, then what was your point here? To tell me your rank? [/quote]

I can count on you to be yourself. Always ready to rip and full of negativity and bitterness. Of course, you don’t see it and/or deny it. But it’s in most of the posts I have read from you. You must not have a content spirit. Sad.

No, my purpose was NOT to tell you my rank, although I think that should lend SOME credibility.
My point is that you abused the word “ALL” when describing our military’s resources being tied up in Iraq; nothing more…nothing less. Blanket statements are good things to avoid.