Ok, here's the thing ...

[Maggie_T]

I've was listening to the Mike Gallagher and Sean Hannity talk shows today.

Mike was asking liberals to call the show and tell him what they thought of today's almost 9/11 Chapter II (thank God, foiled by British Intelligence) ... and unfortunately, they did.

For example, there was this teacher that called to say that it's all America's and Bush's fault. So Gallagher asks in disbelief if she would call Islamofascists who almost blew up about 10 planes - with innocent woment and children in them - terrorists. And the "teacher" answers that no, she wouldn't. She understands them, you see. Terrorists are doing what they are doing because they are angry at America. So Gallagher asks, why?! "Because we did some very bad things in the past," she mewled. "It's our fault if they hate us."

Oh.

Then, there was this ... person ... who called Sean and asked the following question: "Can you tell me how many planes were hiked by terrorists before 1948?" (for the victims of public education, that was when Israel was created from he partition of the old British territory in the Middle East). Ah! Not many, eh? Get it?

So I'm starting this thread because I have some genuine questions for liberals out there (oh, yes; I know you're lurking).

First of all, considering you are the ones who go about with bumper stickers that read "An eye for an eye only leaves people blind," how do you justify Islamofascists - and other assorted anti-America cults - doing exactly that because we support Israel, or because they hate us. Or do you give terrorists a special pass? And if you do, why? Why do they have the right to vengeance, while white Westeners and Israelis have to bow their head in submission, and allow the Ahmadinejads of this world blow them into eternity?

In the second place, if - like the "teacher" said - terrorists hate us and want to kill us because "we did some very bad things in the past," does that mean that I can go about blowing up Germans because of what they did during WWII? Because they did some very bad things at that time, you know. Went about rounding up people they did not like and turning them to ashes in ovens, and suffocating them in gas chambers. I hate that. Can't have that. I'm really angry at the bastards for what they did in the past. So. Can I go and let off bombs in German towns because of "the bad things they did in the past?" Well, why not? How is my anger less genuine than that of Islamofascist terrorists?

Oh, so you don't belive the Holocaust really happened? Ok, let's try something else. Let's go back to Pearl Harbor. Now, at the time we were not at war with anyone, not even the Nazis. Yet, one fine day, out of nowhere, here come a bunch of Japanese planes and start dropping bombs on Pearl Harbor like April rain. Which caused us in due time to drop the Big One on them, reducing two of their towns to parking lots. Teach them.

Now, I know that you peaceniks shudder and go on stress-induced tofu binges at the memory of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But why? What they did to us in Pearl Harbor was a very bad thing. Very bad thing, indeed. We were minding our own business and they showered bombs on us. So, according to this "teacher" credo, we had the right to "return the gesture" and hate the Japs because they did a very bad thing in the past, right?

So I ask you, is that all it takes in your view to justify Islamofascist terrorists' hatred for America, and their wanting to erase us from the face of the earth? That America did "some very bad things in the past?" And would you care to specify exactly what were those we did that were so bad that they justify people wanting to blow us out of here?

Another question I have for you is, do actually want the Western world to be blown up by Islamofascist terrorists? I merely ask because you all go out of your way to undermine the war on terror. You go on endless protest marches, waving signs that read "We support our troops only if they kill their generals" (BTW, I thought you hated killings of any sort). You worship Cindy Sheehan. You kick up a tantrum and demand "rights" for those who fly planes into our buildings, killing thousands. Your representatives in Congress go on endless tirades against Bush. You know. "Bush is a Nazi!" "Bush is a terrorist!" "Bush lied to us!" (I thought you didn't mind if presidents fibbed now and then ... ok, never mind). Stuff like that. Every single day of the week. You just kicked a long-time liberal senator in the butt because he supports the war on terror.

Not meaning to start a fight with you, but I cannot help but think that you probably believe the Western world deserves what it's getting at the hands of Islamofascists. Yeah, let them kill all white Westeners! Bloody bastards deseve no less. Of course, that begs the question, and what about you? Because Islamofascists will come after you, too, you know ... unless of course, you got some sort of agreement with them that we lesser mortals know nothing of.

Do you sincerely believe that our dying at the hands of Islamofascists will expiate our "faults"? All those bad things we did in the past? Are you willing do die for that "redemption"? Or are you just willing to let other people die for it, while you "reap the benefits," so to speak? Yes, I know of your obsession with multiculturalism and diversity, and all that. But Isreal is also an "ethnic" group, you know ... ah, but they are America's (real) allies. So that disqualifies them as "preferred ethnic group", I guess. Forgive me. I spoke without thinking.

Also, how come you support (yes, you do) people like Islamists, who hate homosexuals, who treat women merely as reproductive machines, with no rights whatsoever (you think Bush oppresses women?), who cut off the hands of robbers, sans previous trial, etc.? No, it's not an invention by the vast right-wing conspiracy. It's the truth.

Why do you support that sort of thing? Do you, liberal women, want to be subjected to the Shaira law (you really think Islamists consider abortion as your "right"?) Do you want to go around in burkas? Looks like you do, judging by the efforts you put in undermining our fight with terrorists. Heck, you even refuse to call them terrorists. You use euphemisms like "freedom fighters" and "insurgents" and whatnot.

I ask all these questions, because I simply cannot understand your behavior of late. Is your thirst for power so strong that you are willing to aid and abet the enemy, an enemy that hates you as much as they hate your president (but then again, you hate him, too, don't you?) I guess as long as you end up in charge, you don't mind how many innocent people die (you, who bleat about the innocent dead in Iraq). The important thing is to defeat Republicans/conservatives and get a liberal back in the White House at any cost, right?

I wait your answer with much interest.

[DoctorDoom]

This should be interesting (if not amusing). :popcorn:

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

:munch: Hey Doc, you gotta share the popcorn!

[Maggie_T]

Don't hold your breath, guys. We all know that liberals are notorious for dodging issues they do not like to confront.

[DesertFox]

Well, I'm with the teacher. I, also, "understand" them Arabs.

I understand that they're barbaric assholes. They're murderous lunatics. They're camel fellaters.

I understand that if they come after me and mine, I'm gonna blow their shit away and they will not pass go, collect $200 and go to virginland. They'll just be dead, stinking meat that I'll cover with more pigshit and bury deep enough that the Chinese will bitch about the stink.

[Maggie_T]

LOL. I LOVE it, Fox. :thumb:

[Black Phoenix]

I don't think the libs take the terrorists threats very seriously. If they're elected to power, they probably won't be nearly as effective, but you can bet they'll take precautions against the terrorists as well. In the end though, the libs don't believe we're facing opponents who can win, so their not worried about it happening. They also know this president won't back off, and when it comes time to face the music, their representatives constantly vote pro-war. They only say what they say because they know they can and they really don't think anything will come of it.

Of course they don't want us to lose, but they know we won't, so they can scream all the anti American retorhic they want. It is hard to respect the islamofacists, as worthy adversaries, I have to admit, especially when entire nations under their control fall in a manner of weeks. These nuts could have been eaten alive by the Nazi war machine even given their modern technology and stratigies, versus his 1940s technology, Hitler could still have beaten the radical Arabs. And way back when we had old technology, we made Hitler's forces wish they hadn't been born.

It's been two decades since this country has had a worthy opponent, the only country left in the world that could possibly have both the motive and ability to challenge us is China, and that probably won't be happening any time soon, considering an American trade embargo would probably sink the whole country without firing a shot.

Honestly, I don't think the liberals mean a word of what they're saying, they're just saying it cause they can and it gets ratings and what not.

[Maggie_T]

Oh, come now, Phoenix. You give them waaay too much credit.

The rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth liberals that called in on the talk shows today sounded NOTHING like your post.

Make no mistake, liberals hate America as much as they hate Bush. the Michael Moores, who say that nobody is as dumb as an American - I would agree with him if he meant those who pay money to watch his lie-o-mentaries ... and believe them - are not just kids acting rebellious.

Personally, I think they want America and the rest of the Western world to collapse because, as I said, they believe it is the only way "white Judeo-Christian" cultures will redeem themselves from their past. White Guilt, and all that.

No, Phoenix. Liberals are not just pulling tantrums. They hate America and they hate Bush. AND they believe they will "reason" with terrorists once they (liberals) are in charge. Don't underestimate the bastards. You do so at your own peril.

[Black Phoenix]

Oh I ain't gonna vote for em' and don't missunderstand, I stand against them, but honestly, do you really think the dems in congress, for instance, mean one word of the retorhic they spew out, when their votes always say they support the war?

They know we're not gonna lose, only an idoit wouldn't figure that out. However, they know the louder they scream this anti-American crap, the more people will tune in. I think their idiots, just not that dumb.

However, these ain't no compliments. Only a coward or a creep shouts insults at his savoir once he knows he's safe. Heh, reminds me of the old Spider-Man comics. Spider-man swoops in and saves JJJ, only to hear Peter Parker's boss scream about how horrible he is the next day to all of the media, only because he knows spidey will always save him in the end no matter how he's insulted, and attacking our red costumed hero, sells papers. Anyone see Spiderman 2? Nearing the middle or something, when spider man retires, JJJ starts throwing a pity party about all the horrible things that will happen. Then as spidey steals his suite back to re-assume his crime figthing days, without losing a breath, Jona is back to calling him a menace and a crook.

C'mon, don't you see how the liberals are wailing about the "real threat" in North Korea? But I'll bet you ten bucks, if we initiate war as many of them claim to want, immediately they'll talk like we're the bad guys and we should give the country back to Mr. Ill... isn't that pretty much what happened with Saddam? Didn't the libs almost give us a full back until a few days after we invaded and then "suddenly", the whole thing was over oil.

They're either posturing for support, or looking for ratings, but no, they never mean what they say.

[Timberwolf]

Gosh, the silence from the lefties is absolutely deafening...Maggie, that was one rockin' post!! I, too, await the answers with baited breath.

[Trevelyan]

First of all, considering you are the ones who go about with bumper stickers that read "An eye for an eye only leaves people blind," how do you justify Islamofascists - and other assorted anti-America cults - doing exactly that because we support Israel, or because they hate us. Or do you give terrorists a special pass?

No.

In the second place, if - like the "teacher" said - terrorists hate us and want to kill us because "we did some very bad things in the past," does that mean that I can go about blowing up Germans because of what they did during WWII? Because they did some very bad things at that time, you know. Went about rounding up people they did not like and turning them to ashes in ovens, and suffocating them in gas chambers. I hate that. Can't have that. I'm really angry at the bastards for what they did in the past. So. Can I go and let off bombs in German towns because of "the bad things they did in the past?" Well, why not? How is my anger less genuine than that of Islamofascist terrorists?

No.

Oh, so you don't belive the Holocaust really happened?

That's Mel Gibson's father and the president of Iran.

Another question I have for you is, do actually want the Western world to be blown up by Islamofascist terrorists? I merely ask because you all go out of your way to undermine the war on terror. You go on endless protest marches, waving signs that read "We support our troops only if they kill their generals" (BTW, I thought you hated killings of any sort). You worship Cindy Sheehan. You kick up a tantrum and demand "rights" for those who fly planes into our buildings, killing thousands. Your representatives in Congress go on endless tirades against Bush. You know. "Bush is a Nazi!" "Bush is a terrorist!" "Bush lied to us!" (I thought you didn't mind if presidents fibbed now and then ... ok, never mind). Stuff like that. Every single day of the week. You just kicked a long-time liberal senator in the butt because he supports the war on terror.

I do not condone the "Bush is a Nazi" rhetoric, but I surely cannot stand the guy either.

Anyway, worshipping Sheehan and much of what is cited above does not apply to me.

Not meaning to start a fight with you, but I cannot help but think that you probably believe the Western world deserves what it's getting at the hands of Islamofascists. Yeah, let them kill all white Westeners! Bloody bastards deseve no less.

No.

Also, how come you support (yes, you do) people like Islamists, who hate homosexuals, who treat women merely as reproductive machines, with no rights whatsoever (you think Bush oppresses women?), who cut off the hands of robbers, sans previous trial, etc.? No, it's not an invention by the vast right-wing conspiracy. It's the truth.

I honestly do not know why some liberals support people like this. I am not even going to try to claim they do not, because I have seen it myself. It is contrary to anything I belief constitutes a liberal, but hey, so does much of what I read here.

[Maggie_T]

Trev, for the umpteenth time, the fact that you are not like liberals I described in my post does NOT mean they do not exist. They do and they are MANY.

For Pete's sake, I am so sick and tired of liberals muttering "uh-uh, not me" whenever you expose the vast majority of the hate-filled "multiculturalists" in their ranks.

I was listening to a local talk show this morning. A Brit called in (he's half American) from London and explained how liberal Brits are howling and pouting because the police rounded up some suspects and they are now in jail. This Brit told everyone how liberals are (get this) hysterically asking "How do you know it was Islamists?" "How do you know this is real?" (?!?!)

He was in shock and so am I.

And your rant about Gibson was a cheap shot, Trev. Even for you. Leave it to liberals to zero in on the ONE conservative who screws up to distract attention from their own hundreds of thousands of racists.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

I was listening to a local talk show this morning. A Brit called in (he's half American) from London and explained how liberal Brits are howling and pouting because the police rounded up some suspects and they are now in jail. This Brit told everyone how liberals are (get this) hysterically asking "How do you know it was Islamists?" "How do you know this is real?" (?!?!)

He was in shock and so am I.

Maggie, I feel your shock and awe, :smirky: . Lemme tell you what happened yesterday afternoon! Bubba comes home and as always we discuss the happenings of the day. I asked if he heard about the terrorist plot being thwarted and he says yes, but he about pulled his hair out at work when it came on the telly in the breakroom because ALL the other employees were saying the EXACT SAME THING: "How do you know it was Islamists?" "How do you know this is real?"

I kid you not Sis, Bubba said they were all saying it was some kind of "wag the dog" trick to take attention off the war in Iraq and the heat off President Bush for LYING TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC to get us into the war! :eek:

:smirky: I guess it shouldn't be too unexpected, though . . . Bubba DOES work for the local (government) public school system, http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/goofyeye.gif .

[TechnoPrincess]

HMS - That doesn't shock me. I've heard the same thing from some of the union guys I work with.

[DoctorDoom]

ALL the other employees were saying the EXACT SAME THING: "How do you know it was Islamists?" "How do you know this is real?"Welcome to the naive, ignorant world of the sheeple, who get their "news" spoonfed to them by the DBM talking heads and don't give a schitte about anything as long as the batteries are fresh in the remotes.

Nah, they weren't Islamofascists. They were the Liverpool soccer team members.

<center><img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/sheeple.gif" /></center>

[Borgia]

So I'm starting this thread because I have some genuine questions for liberals out there (oh, yes; I know you're lurking).
Cool, I hope you will listen to our responses.

First of all, considering you are the ones who go about with bumper stickers that read "An eye for an eye only leaves people blind," how do you justify Islamofascists - and other assorted anti-America cults - doing exactly that because we support Israel, or because they hate us. Or do you give terrorists a special pass?
What they do is wrong. No special pass here.


In the second place, if - like the "teacher" said - terrorists hate us and want to kill us because "we did some very bad things in the past," does that mean that I can go about blowing up Germans because of what they did during WWII? Because they did some very bad things at that time, you know. Went about rounding up people they did not like and turning them to ashes in ovens, and suffocating them in gas chambers. I hate that. Can't have that. I'm really angry at the bastards for what they did in the past. So. Can I go and let off bombs in German towns because of "the bad things they did in the past?" Well, why not? How is my anger less genuine than that of Islamofascist terrorists?
Well one way your analogy fails is Germany is quite different today than it was back then, right? The Arab world today still has the same problems today that it had in the past. I don't think Arabs see thier situations as having been "fixed".

Regardless, it does not justify terrorism in my eyes.

Oh, so you don't belive the Holocaust really happened?
Who are you talking to?

Now, I know that you peaceniks shudder and go on stress-induced tofu binges at the memory of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But why? What they did to us in Pearl Harbor was a very bad thing.
I don't shudder and I hate tofu. I also think we did the right thing in Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

From the Arab point of view, the wrong has never been corrected and thus they keep fighting. Not my point of view but theirs.

Another question I have for you is, do actually want the Western world to be blown up by Islamofascist terrorists?
No.
I merely ask because you all go out of your way to undermine the war on terror. You go on endless protest marches, waving signs that read "We support our troops only if they kill their generals" (BTW, I thought you hated killings of any sort). You worship Cindy Sheehan. You kick up a tantrum and demand "rights" for those who fly planes into our buildings, killing thousands. Your representatives in Congress go on endless tirades against Bush. You know. "Bush is a Nazi!" "Bush is a terrorist!" "Bush lied to us!" (I thought you didn't mind if presidents fibbed now and then ... ok, never mind). Stuff like that. Every single day of the week. You just kicked a long-time liberal senator in the butt because he supports the war on terror.

Yep, lots of people feel strongly and show it. I don't agree with the Nazi or terrorist reference myself.

Not meaning to start a fight with you, but I cannot help but think that you probably believe the Western world deserves what it's getting at the hands of Islamofascists.
Deserves? No. Nobody deserves terrorism. Surprised? No.


Do you sincerely believe that our dying at the hands of Islamofascists will expiate our "faults"? All those bad things we did in the past? Are you willing do die for that "redemption"? Or are you just willing to let other people die for it, while you "reap the benefits," so to speak? Yes, I know of your obsession with multiculturalism and diversity, and all that. But Isreal is also an "ethnic" group, you know ... ah, but they are America's (real) allies. So that disqualifies them as "preferred ethnic group", I guess. Forgive me. I spoke without thinking.
I don't plan on dying for the terrorists. LEt other people die for me? I guess we all are since our military is dying every day for us. Lots of liberals and conservatives of recruitable age are not signing up. What's your point?


Also, how come you support (yes, you do) people like Islamists, who hate homosexuals, who treat women merely as reproductive machines, with no rights whatsoever (you think Bush oppresses women?), who cut off the hands of robbers, sans previous trial, etc.? No, it's not an invention by the vast right-wing conspiracy. It's the truth.
Support? It is a different country. Not our rules. I would like them to change but I am not sure how much we want to go running around forcing others to change.

[markus3622]

I'm pretty liberal


First of all, considering you are the ones who go about with bumper stickers that read "An eye for an eye only leaves people blind," how do you justify Islamofascists - and other assorted anti-America cults - doing exactly that because we support Israel, or because they hate us. Or do you give terrorists a special pass? And if you do, why? Why do they have the right to vengeance, while white Westeners and Israelis have to bow their head in submission, and allow the Ahmadinejads of this world blow them into eternity?


I don't believe that terrorists have a "right" to attack the west. I don't justify it.


In the second place, if - like the "teacher" said - terrorists hate us and want to kill us because "we did some very bad things in the past," does that mean that I can go about blowing up Germans because of what they did during WWII? Because they did some very bad things at that time, you know. Went about rounding up people they did not like and turning them to ashes in ovens, and suffocating them in gas chambers. I hate that. Can't have that. I'm really angry at the bastards for what they did in the past. So. Can I go and let off bombs in German towns because of "the bad things they did in the past?" Well, why not? How is my anger less genuine than that of Islamofascist terrorists?


No, of course you can't justify your hypothetical attack on Germany because of WW1. I do accept that many in the Muslim world are angry at perceived aggrievances that, although rooted as far back in the past, are believed to have current implications.

Oh, so you don't belive the Holocaust really happened? Ok, let's try something else. Let's go back to Pearl Harbor. Now, at the time we were not at war with anyone, not even the Nazis. Yet, one fine day, out of nowhere, here come a bunch of Japanese planes and start dropping bombs on Pearl Harbor like April rain. Which caused us in due time to drop the Big One on them, reducing two of their towns to parking lots. Teach them.


Now, I know that you peaceniks shudder and go on stress-induced tofu binges at the memory of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But why? What they did to us in Pearl Harbor was a very bad thing. Very bad thing, indeed. We were minding our own business and they showered bombs on us. So, according to this "teacher" credo, we had the right to "return the gesture" and hate the Japs because they did a very bad thing in the past, right?

No

So I ask you, is that all it takes in your view to justify Islamofascist terrorists' hatred for America, and their wanting to erase us from the face of the earth? That America did "some very bad things in the past?" And would you care to specify exactly what were those we did that were so bad that they justify people wanting to blow us out of here?

I don't justify terrorists' hatred for America.


Another question I have for you is, do actually want the Western world to be blown up by Islamofascist terrorists? I merely ask because you all go out of your way to undermine the war on terror. You go on endless protest marches, waving signs that read "We support our troops only if they kill their generals" (BTW, I thought you hated killings of any sort). You worship Cindy Sheehan. You kick up a tantrum and demand "rights" for those who fly planes into our buildings, killing thousands. Your representatives in Congress go on endless tirades against Bush. You know. "Bush is a Nazi!" "Bush is a terrorist!" "Bush lied to us!" (I thought you didn't mind if presidents fibbed now and then ... ok, never mind). Stuff like that. Every single day of the week. You just kicked a long-time liberal senator in the butt because he supports the war on terror.


No


Not meaning to start a fight with you, but I cannot help but think that you probably believe the Western world deserves what it's getting at the hands of Islamofascists. Yeah, let them kill all white Westeners! Bloody bastards deseve no less. Of course, that begs the question, and what about you? Because Islamofascists will come after you, too, you know ... unless of course, you got some sort of agreement with them that we lesser mortals know nothing of.

No


[quote]

Do you sincerely believe that our dying at the hands of Islamofascists will expiate our "faults"? All those bad things we did in the past? Are you willing do die for that "redemption"? Or are you just willing to let other people die for it, while you "reap the benefits," so to speak? Yes, I know of your obsession with multiculturalism and diversity, and all that. But Isreal is also an "ethnic" group, you know ... ah, but they are America's (real) allies. So that disqualifies them as "preferred ethnic group", I guess. Forgive me. I spoke without thinking.


No



Also, how come you support (yes, you do) people like Islamists, who hate homosexuals, who treat women merely as reproductive machines, with no rights whatsoever (you think Bush oppresses women?), who cut off the hands of robbers, sans previous trial, etc.? No, it's not an invention by the vast right-wing conspiracy. It's the truth.



I don't support Islamists.


Why do you support that sort of thing? Do you, liberal women, want to be subjected to the Shaira law (you really think Islamists consider abortion as your "right"?) Do you want to go around in burkas? Looks like you do, judging by the efforts you put in undermining our fight with terrorists. Heck, you even refuse to call them terrorists. You use euphemisms like "freedom fighters" and "insurgents" and whatnot.



I don't support that kind of thing

[Maggie_T]

Well one way your analogy fails is Germany is quite different today than it was back then, right? The Arab world today still has the same problems today that it had in the past. I don't think Arabs see thier situations as having been "fixed".

Don't start splitting hairs, Borgia. However, if you insist, the situation the Nazis created - ANTI-SEMITISM - has been far from fixed, wouldn't you say? Anti-Semitism is alive and well. Even among some conservatives, as Trev stumbled over himself to point out.

Regardless, it does not justify terrorism in my eyes.

But you had to make allowances for Arabs (yes, you did!). No surprise.

Who are you talking to?

Ok, make it "talking about." People like Ahmadinejad, who think that the Holocaust never happened; and people like Mike Wallace, who say that he (Ahmadinejad) makes "a good argument" when he says that the Holocaust never happened. And there are a lot of liberals who agree with Mike Wallace. THAT'S who I'm talking about.

From the Arab point of view, the wrong has never been corrected and thus they keep fighting. Not my point of view but theirs.

YOUR point of view justifies the Arabs in a roundabout way. I don't hear you condemn them. I just hear you shrugging it off as "their point of view." But you do hurry to bring it up, don't you.

Yep, lots of people feel strongly and show it. I don't agree with the Nazi or terrorist reference myself.

There you go again. You say that YOU don't want the West to die, but you seem to be willing to make the case for those who do. Freedom of speech, and all that, right. :rolleyes:


I don't plan on dying for the terrorists. LEt other people die for me? I guess we all are since our military is dying every day for us. Lots of liberals and conservatives of recruitable age are not signing up. What's your point?

The one you wouldn't see if I impaled you on it. I was not talking about the military. I was referring to those who aid and abet the enemy when the enemy bombs NON-military places and kill thousands of innocent people. I was talking about the morons that I, Homes, Technoprincess refer to. The ones who go about asking "How do you know that's true?" ect. Whether you want to admit it or not, they are aiding and abetting the enemy. Therefore, they are letting other people die for their twisted preception of "redemption." They never think that it may be them the next time. Just like you (and others who post here) refuse to believe that the majority of you ilk are foaming-at-the-mouth hate-filled lunatics, just because YOU claim not to be like them. I added that to answer your predictable question.

Support? It is a different country. Not our rules. I would like them to change but I am not sure how much we want to go running around forcing others to change.

Quite. But that's not what I meant. What I meant was - and you, as usual, pretend to take it from a totally different angle - that these terrorists want to impose their laws on the Western world. They want to convert the Western world (read the Ayatollah Khomeini's own words, which, BTW, figure in Islamic children's school books). So, if they win - and it will be thanks to all those noisy pro-3rd world hellholes, anti-Western world that according to you, do not exist - the first thing they'll do will be impose their laws on the conquered (you and me, dear).

So, if I were you, I'd start considering forcing them to change their medieval lasw. Or at least, make sure they do not win and so, impose them on us.

You are so predictable, Borgia.:rolleyes:

[Lazarus]

No...No...
That's Mel Gibson's father and the president of Iran...
I do not condone the "Bush is a Nazi" rhetoric, but I surely cannot stand the guy either...
Anyway, worshipping Sheehan and much of what is cited above does not apply to me....
No...
I honestly do not know why some liberals support people like this. I am not even going to try to claim they do not, because I have seen it myself. It is contrary to anything I belief constitutes a liberal, but hey, so does much of what I read here.Trev, you're FC's version of Joe Lieberman... A lib but a civil human being too... And that is a rareity... We have duely noted your responses...

As for Maggie's initial post, I want to ask her....
Have I told you lately that I love you?:hugs:

[Maggie_T]

I'm pretty liberal

NO! Really? :rolleyes:


No, of course you can't justify your hypothetical attack on Germany because of WW1. I do accept that many in the Muslim world are angry at perceived aggrievances that, although rooted as far back in the past, are believed to have current implications.

I'll give you the same answer I gave Borgia (who gave me the same answer you did). What the Nazis did also continues to have current implications. Anti-Semitism is as alive and well and vicious as it was in 1939. Or haven't you noticed? I suppose you're goin gto dismiss it as an exaggeration. Just like you dismiss the fact that communism is also still alive and well.

For the rest, read my answers to Borgia.

[markus3622]

I'll give you the same answer I gave Borgia (who gave me the same answer you did). What the Nazis did also continues to have current implications. Anti-Semitism is as alive and well and vicious as it was in 1939. Or haven't you noticed? I suppose you're goin gto dismiss it as an exaggeration. Just like you dismiss the fact that communism is also still alive and well.

For the rest, read my answers to Borgia.

I'm not sure your Nazi analogy works. Yes, there's antisemitism around, but very little of it is related to Nazi Germany, but rather to a warped religious view. Therefore attacking present day Germany because of current anti-semitism would be silly. I'm not sure what your point is.

I'm sorry I don't believe what you feel I should believe as a liberal. If you just tell me what I should believe as a cartoon liberal, maybe I'll oblige. That's what's wrong with your analysis.

I actually agree with what George Bush and Tony Blair are saying about terrorism, and they seem to make the same point rather consistently. The civilized world is at war with a warped ideology. Where you seem to go wrong is bringing everything down to liberalism. Not everything is conservatives v. liberals. Just because you believe something, doesn't mean I as a liberal believe the opposite.

[Beowulf]

I have a question, Maggie, for Liberals, that they never answer. Rather, they criticize current action rather than offer solution. So, the question is this since they criticize the Bush administration and the war on terror:

What is YOUR solution to the problem? Yes, I MAY debate the answer depending on what it may be.

[Trevelyan]

Trev, for the umpteenth time, the fact that you are not like liberals I described in my post does NOT mean they do not exist. They do and they are MANY.

For Pete's sake, I am so sick and tired of liberals muttering "uh-uh, not me" whenever you expose the vast majority of the hate-filled "multiculturalists" in their ranks.

You asked direct questions to those who would consider themselves liberals, so I answered them as such.

Also, I have never, nor am I going to claim that there are not people as you described, because I have heard some crazy things before as well. What I just wonder about is how many such people are out there.

And your rant about Gibson was a cheap shot, Trev. Even for you. Leave it to liberals to zero in on the ONE conservative who screws up to distract attention from their own hundreds of thousands of racists.

I do not know if I would consider it a rant, but that wasn't what I was doing. I also mentioned the president of Iran. I mentioned the people I did, because those are the only two I know of who have denied the Holocaust.

[Black Phoenix]

I'm not sure your Nazi analogy works. Yes, there's antisemitism around, but very little of it is related to Nazi Germany, but rather to a warped religious view. Therefore attacking present day Germany because of current anti-semitism would be silly. I'm not sure what your point is.

If it's not related to Nazi germany, why do they call themselves Nazi, wave old german flags and leave graffeti of crooked crosses? The KKK is a powerful racist group, but I don't remember it being against Jews, nor many other current radical racist religious organizations. The White Supremists also use a (modified to a point) German swastica.

Don't tell an Oregonian the Nazies are gone, I won't believe till I stop seeing their dispicable symbols go up everywhere. No, they're alive, just not as well as they use to be.


I actually agree with what George Bush and Tony Blair are saying about terrorism, and they seem to make the same point rather consistently. The civilized world is at war with a warped ideology. Where you seem to go wrong is bringing everything down to liberalism. Not everything is conservatives v. liberals. Just because you believe something, doesn't mean I as a liberal believe the opposite.


There are those on the democrat side of the isle that have helped such thoughts along. However, I like Rush use to, still think there is a silent majority of Democrats who are getting sick of this... I just wish they'd speak up.

[Maggie_T]

I have a question, Maggie, for Liberals, that they never answer. Rather, they criticize current action rather than offer solution. So, the question is this since they criticize the Bush administration and the war on terror:

What is YOUR solution to the problem? Yes, I MAY debate the answer depending on what it may be.


We all know what their solution is: CUT & RUN. I think they prefer to call it "bring our beloved soldiers back home." :rolleyes:

[Maggie_T]

You asked direct questions to those who would consider themselves liberals, so I answered them as such.

Oh, of course. I forgot that liberals are so literal. If you tell them 'I worked like a dog,' they wonder why you didn't bark it. :rolleyes:

Also, I have never, nor am I going to claim that there are not people as you described, because I have heard some crazy things before as well. What I just wonder about is how many such people are out there.

How many do you need?

I do not know if I would consider it a rant, but that wasn't what I was doing. I also mentioned the president of Iran. I mentioned the people I did, because those are the only two I know of who have denied the Holocaust.

You don't get out much, do you?

[Maggie_T]

I'm not sure your Nazi analogy works. Yes, there's antisemitism around, but very little of it is related to Nazi Germany, but rather to a warped religious view. Therefore attacking present day Germany because of current anti-semitism would be silly. I'm not sure what your point is.

Like Borgia, you wouldn't see my point if you were impaled on it. What a coincidence that two liberals think the same thing and even express it in the same words. :rolleyes:

Black Phoenix answered that already. Unlike you, I won't repeat what another poster said.

I'm sorry I don't believe what you feel I should believe as a liberal. If you just tell me what I should believe as a cartoon liberal, maybe I'll oblige. That's what's wrong with your analysis.

Well, apart from the fact that all liberals are as ridiculous as cartoon characters, the fact that you are - or claim to be - a "moderate" liberal does not mean all the others are. I don't know how many times you need to hear that, but I'll be glad to oblige.

I actually agree with what George Bush and Tony Blair are saying about terrorism, and they seem to make the same point rather consistently. The civilized world is at war with a warped ideology. Where you seem to go wrong is bringing everything down to liberalism. Not everything is conservatives v. liberals. Just because you believe something, doesn't mean I as a liberal believe the opposite.

"I, me, mine" Markus, the world does not revolve around you. You are not the only liberal in the world. If you want to consider it a coincidence that 99.9% of liberals are in complete disagreement with me and others who think ike me, please yourself.

You are like the liberals who doggedly refuse to believe that Islamofascists are the enemy. No, to the morons, it's George Bush who's the enemy.

[Borgia]

But you had to make allowances for Arabs (yes, you did!). No surprise.
I did? I thought all I did was provide the Arab point of view and then disagree with it? Is it considered verboten to even mention it? Agreeing is another story.


YOUR point of view justifies the Arabs in a roundabout way. I don't hear you condemn them. I just hear you shrugging it off as "their point of view." But you do hurry to bring it up, don't you.
Then let me turn up the volume for you. I condemn their point of view. Sound good?


There you go again. You say that YOU don't want the West to die, but you seem to be willing to make the case for those who do. Freedom of speech, and all that, right. :rolleyes:
Where did I defend those who want the West to die? Frankly, I think those people are few and far between. All I said was people speak, no big deal. I am not going to broadbrush large swathes of people based on a few kooks.

So people march, so they want Bush out. Doesn't mean they want the West to be killed.

(...)
You are so predictable, Borgia.:rolleyes:

Hmm, I was under the impression that you wanted to have a dialogue. It seems you really just wanted someone to preach at. Sorry about taking your initial post the wrong way.

[Borgia]

I have a question, Maggie, for Liberals, that they never answer. Rather, they criticize current action rather than offer solution. So, the question is this since they criticize the Bush administration and the war on terror:

What is YOUR solution to the problem? Yes, I MAY debate the answer depending on what it may be.

All right, but you probably won't like my answer. I think we need to stay in Iraq longer. I do not really favor pulling out at this time as I think it would lead to instability in the region and certainly a civil war with some sort of Iranian controlled govt erupting like an ulcer in the region.

So I guess I support Bush in keeping troops there for a bit longer. At some point we need to reassess and if our presence there is merely exacerbating the situation, we slowly pull out. I would also say that if the Iraqi president (or whatever he's called) asks us to leave, well then we leave.

Frankly, I have some strong reservations whether we stay longer or not if it will make a difference. But as long as we are in there already, we have to try. I am not in favor of a hard deadline although there could be certain milestones to measure our progress and have a soft deadlines for those. That timetable should not be made public though.

[Maggie_T]

You call repeating your wishful thinking that rabid liberals are not the majority a dialogue?

(Throwing hands up) Whatever. I give up.

[Black Phoenix]

All right, but you probably won't like my answer. I think we need to stay in Iraq longer. I do not really favor pulling out at this time as I think it would lead to instability in the region and certainly a civil war with some sort of Iranian controlled govt erupting like an ulcer in the region.

So I guess I support Bush in keeping troops there for a bit longer. At some point we need to reassess and if our presence there is merely exacerbating the situation, we slowly pull out. I would also say that if the Iraqi president (or whatever he's called) asks us to leave, well then we leave.

Frankly, I have some strong reservations whether we stay longer or not if it will make a difference. But as long as we are in there already, we have to try. I am not in favor of a hard deadline although there could be certain milestones to measure our progress and have a soft deadlines for those. That timetable should not be made public though.

Who says we won't like those answers? That's almost out of our handbook. No set deadline, stay till the job is done or it's more productive to go, and us leaving now would probably throw the region into chaos. But you do realize the number of reps and public speakers on the democrat side of the isle who will say those things are few and far between. If you be part of some silent majority, get together with your friend and get them to speak up.

Of course, are you one of the guys who says the whole thing was over oil, dispite how events have played out for the whole world to see, and now that we're there, we're kinda stuck?

I know silent majorities exist, but since they are silent, they may as well not exist. <!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

[Ant]

You call repeating your wishful thinking that rabid liberals are not the majority a dialogue?

(Throwing hands up) Whatever. I give up.

Most vociferous != most numerous

From what I've seen of their posts, and taking from what I know of friends and family who identify themselves as "liberals", I think Borgia, Trevelyan, and Marcus are probably more representative of the majority of self-identified liberals than you think.

[Borgia]

So, if I were you, I'd start considering forcing them to change their medieval lasw. Or at least, make sure they do not win and so, impose them on us.

Actually, I have long been a proponent of attempting them to change their laws to a more open society. Unfortunately the tools in our arsenal for getting to change their laws are:

1. Economic
2. Military

I have always been a HUGE proponent of us attempting to get a coalition of nations together to use withholding of economic aid, be it money, equipment, modern necessities and so on, as a means to pressure these countries to change. Simply put, we tell them we choose not to deal with countries that lack certain rights that we consider important to a civilized society. It does not have to be all or nothing either.

I understand there would be problems with this since we would need a coalition which can be hard to do. Further, many of these countries are oil rich so don't need our help so much. Also, we need their oil. I am sure there are other problems associated with this tactic too.

[Borgia]

Of course, are you one of the guys who says the whole thing was over oil, dispite how events have played out for the whole world to see, and now that we're there, we're kinda stuck?
I don't think that it was all about oil but I do think if Iraq was not sitting on oil we would not be there. The presence of oil certainly influences our foreign policy. How much is certainly debatable.

[Borgia]

Most vociferous != most numerous

From what I've seen of their posts, and taking from what I know of friends and family who identify themselves as "liberals", I think Borgia, Trevelyan, and Marcus are probably more representative of the majority of self-identified liberals than you think.

Well, it certainly is my experience as well. I think Maggie has had some strong experiences with those rabid liberals she talks about and those experiences color her perceptions.

[Rhino]

The presence of oil certainly influences our foreign policy.
It wasn't the presence of it in Iraq, but rather the presence in the region they threatened. Oil certainly influences our foreign policy, and rightly so.

[Borgia]

It wasn't the presence of it in Iraq, but rather the presence in the region they threatened. Oil certainly influences our foreign policy, and rightly so.
Agreed. And I made no judgement on oil influencing our policy. Just an observation that it does.

[Black Phoenix]

I don't think that it was all about oil but I do think if Iraq was not sitting on oil we would not be there. The presence of oil certainly influences our foreign policy. How much is certainly debatable.

Actually I critisize the notion that we wouldn't have gone in if oil wasn't an issue. That's rather silly. Yea, it played a role if you want to get down to it but no, it was not the supreme reason. If oil plays THAT big of a role, tell me, why do over 30,000 troops continue to this day, to patrol the DMZ in the Koreas? Why haven't we pulled out of the Balkans? Why haven't we taken oil as spoils of war in any conflict during this administration? (Is there much of an oil industry in Afganistan?). Hell, for that matter, if we're THAT committed to getting it overseas, why aren't we taking oil from right here in our own country?<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

[Borgia]

Actually I critisize the notion that we wouldn't have gone in if oil wasn't an issue. That's rather silly. Yea, it played a role if you want to get down to it but no, it was not the supreme reason. If oil plays THAT big of a role, tell me, why do over 30,000 troops continue to this day, to patrol the DMZ in the Koreas? Why haven't we pulled out of the Balkans? Why haven't we taken oil as spoils of war in any conflict during this administration? (Is there much of an oil industry in Afganistan?). Hell, for that matter, if we're THAT committed to getting it overseas, why aren't we taking oil from right here in our own country?<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

As long as the spice oil flows, we are happy. AS years progressed, we have become more dependent on oil. We have plenty of troops all around the world that are stationed in places with no regard to oil. Each place has its own reason. It would be illogical to think that oil could not be a reason for Iraq based on other areas. Nobody is saying that ALL conflicts are due to oil. If someone asserted that then you would have a case for your argument above.

Taking oil as spoils for the war would make us look like looters and certainly would make it next to impossible to reform Iraq successfully. Further, other nations would scream bloody murder.

Again, we don't need to take it, as long as we get to buy it.

[kkkron]

It's reply time! Although I can't speak for liberals as a whole, or even liberals as a minority as I don't get much debate wih any (for some rason, 15YOs in Britain are mostly incredibly dense or ignorant), I know YOU see me as a liberal, so I'll give my thoughts anyway.

For example, there was this teacher that called to say that it's all America's and Bush's fault. So Gallagher asks in disbelief if she would call Islamofascists who almost blew up about 10 planes - with innocent woment and children in them - terrorists. And the "teacher" answers that no, she wouldn't. She understands them, you see. Terrorists are doing what they are doing because they are angry at America. So Gallagher asks, why?! "Because we did some very bad things in the past," she mewled. "It's our fault if they hate us."

Well. What she says is true to a point, but WHAT THE HELL? She is actually condoning terrorist actions? The past is the past. It may well be our predecessor's fault that they hate us, but I know it sure ain't mine personally. And so it's our predecessors fault they hate us. It's not our predecessors fault that they come and MASSACRE US. The thing that gets me is that they refuse to negotiate. So our predecessors didn't negotiate back then. So what? That doesn't give them the right not to negotiate. By that logic, they're reducing themselves to the level of the infidels. And it does clearly show, 'an eye for an eye and everyone ends up blind'.

Then, there was this ... person ... who called Sean and asked the following question: "Can you tell me how many planes were hiked by terrorists before 1948?" (for the victims of public education, that was when Israel was created from he partition of the old British territory in the Middle East). Ah! Not many, eh? Get it?

I don't instantly jump to the conclusion that the guy is anti-Semitic like you, but what he is saying is equally wrong. From what I learned in my Israel vs. Palestine thread (see International News) the land never belonged to the Muslims anyway, so they have no right to demand it from the West. OK, so they want to invade it. Well then, they should at least do it properly, instead of killing innocents until we give up.

So I'm starting this thread because I have some genuine questions for liberals out there (oh, yes; I know you're lurking).

Hmm, well I wouldn't call it lurking.

First of all, considering you are the ones who go about with bumper stickers that read "An eye for an eye only leaves people blind," how do you justify Islamofascists - and other assorted anti-America cults - doing exactly that because we support Israel, or because they hate us.

See above.

Or do you give terrorists a special pass? And if you do, why? Why do they have the right to vengeance, while white Westeners and Israelis have to bow their head in submission, and allow the Ahmadinejads of this world blow them into eternity?

No.

In the second place, if - like the "teacher" said - terrorists hate us and want to kill us because "we did some very bad things in the past," does that mean that I can go about blowing up Germans because of what they did during WWII?

The teacher is a wimp. I would like to know what she would say in reply to that. I'm going to find someone who holds that view and ask them.

Oh, so you don't belive the Holocaust really happened?

You know, traditionally people who claim that are supposed to be right-wing.

Ok, let's try something else. Let's go back to Pearl Harbor. Now, at the time we were not at war with anyone, not even the Nazis. Yet, one fine day, out of nowhere, here come a bunch of Japanese planes and start dropping bombs on Pearl Harbor like April rain. Which caused us in due time to drop the Big One on them, reducing two of their towns to parking lots. Teach them.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki make me sick. That was the general intent: to stun the Japanese into submission. It also stunned the rest of the world into not using powerful warheads.

And would you care to specify exactly what were those we did that were so bad that they justify people wanting to blow us out of here?

Yes I would! You rebelled from our rule, fought our soldiers and then even dared to set up your own country! What nerve!

I merely ask because you all go out of your way to undermine the war on terror.

I'm not a big fan of the war on terror, but the honest truth is, if we don't fight them, they will kill us. I don't like it, but that's the way it is. Personally, however, I don't think it's possible to ever eliminate the terrorist threat by massacring people. The Hezbollah soldiers tend to be seen as martyrs, and the West killing them only attracts more to their cause. And the blatant propaganda that they are exposed to doesn't help either. I think the only way to eliminate the terrorist threat for good is by showing the ordinary civilians that our side is better. Remember Gandhi? However, most of you don't believe that. Eventually the terrorists will lose support and die out. However, seeing as many of the people in power in those countries are terrorist supporters, they will simply churn out propaganda to make the people believe that America is evil and deserves to be destroyed, so that presents a dilemma. We need to set up a rational government and depose the old one, while causing as little damage as possible. We could also violently set up a rational government, which would defeat the point in the short run, but eventually things would calm down. And that doesn't mean not protecting our own people, btw.

You go on endless protest marches, waving signs that read "We support our troops only if they kill their generals"

That doesn't sound liberal to me. Sounds Communist.

You worship Cindy Sheehan.

I've heard her name thrown around here a bit, but I don't actually know anything about her, so no, I wouldn't say I worship her.

You kick up a tantrum and demand "rights" for those who fly planes into our buildings, killing thousands.

No, I don't. I demand rights for everyone who has not comitted a crime. Incidentally, today I thought of an interesting alternative to prison: temporary slavery.

Your representatives in Congress go on endless tirades against Bush. You know. "Bush is a Nazi!" "Bush is a terrorist!" "Bush lied to us!" (I thought you didn't mind if presidents fibbed now and then ... ok, never mind). Stuff like that. Every single day of the week. You just kicked a long-time liberal senator in the butt because he supports the war on terror.

Not relevant to me.

Not meaning to start a fight with you, but I cannot help but think that you probably believe the Western world deserves what it's getting at the hands of Islamofascists. Yeah, let them kill all white Westeners! Bloody bastards deseve no less. Of course, that begs the question, and what about you? Because Islamofascists will come after you, too, you know ... unless of course, you got some sort of agreement with them that we lesser mortals know nothing of.

I look around at Western culture today and I see many immoral things, every day. Promiscuity, although fun, is rife and so many people have such loose morals. Then again, I don't exactly live in the best part of England. Anyway, these loose morals annoy many of the people who frequent this site, and I have seen Christian fundamentalists call for their blood just as much as Islamic ones. the Islamic ones just have the resources and manpower and brainpower to act out what they say.

Do you sincerely believe that our dying at the hands of Islamofascists will expiate our "faults"? All those bad things we did in the past? Are you willing do die for that "redemption"?

Interesting, I don't understand why you linked to Jesus there. Do you criticise Jesus for dying for humanity's sake?

Also, how come you support (yes, you do) people like Islamists, who hate homosexuals, who treat women merely as reproductive machines, with no rights whatsoever (you think Bush oppresses women?), who cut off the hands of robbers, sans previous trial, etc.? No, it's not an invention by the vast right-wing conspiracy. It's the truth.

Islam shares many of the same beliefs expressed in the OT. Whereas Islam suggests aputation as a punishment, the OT suggests stoning. And I do admit from what I have read, which is admittedly very little, the Koran does seem to be a little harsher than the OT.

[Rhino]

.....how many planes were hiked by terrorists before 1948?There weren't very many airliners in existence to hijack, and likely almost none went to the Middle East. Since the world's population wasn't very mobile then, particularly the Middle East, they probably wouldn't have ever even seen an airliner, much less be able to hijack it. How many skyscrapers were bombed prior to 1900?

[kkkron]

Don't start splitting hairs, Borgia. However, if you insist, the situation the Nazis created - ANTI-SEMITISM - has been far from fixed, wouldn't you say? Anti-Semitism is alive and well. Even among some conservatives, as Trev stumbled over himself to point out.

In now way did the Nazis invent anti-Semitism. No way in Hell did the Nazis invent it.

But you had to make allowances for Arabs (yes, you did!). No surprise.

Well your question was mainly concerning Arabs.

YOUR point of view justifies the Arabs in a roundabout way. I don't hear you condemn them. I just hear you shrugging it off as "their point of view." But you do hurry to bring it up, don't you.

You want to destroy them without even learning why they are fighting you? In my book, that's just wrong. My morals say so. It's like telling me the sky is green. It just doesn't compute.

The ones who go about asking "How do you know that's true?" ect.

They do have legitimate points. The government does have motives for making up a threat like this. Past governments have been known to make up events, especially during wartime. The fact that I do not believe this to be the case does not mean that it isn't the case. However, I would like to see them produce a rational argument and evidence that shows that the government is lying, instead of just claiming it every time the government says it has done something. Sometimes it makes me wonder if it would have taken the actual destruction of the planes to make them believe in a terrorist plot. Then again, I saw a Muslim on the news today saying that it had been conclusively proven that 9/11 was done by the USAF. That was, strange, to say the least. Although the rest of his points were completely accurate. Basically, the majority of people in that area are stupid sheep (sometimes it depresses me seeing how many of these people there are) and somehow got it into their heads that every Islam mosque hides a terrorist organisation, and that Islam is evil, without even doing one bit of research into the subject, and the Muslim told them to go away, read the Koran, make sure they understood it, read the OT, make sure they understood that too, and THEN come back and shout at him.

Just like you (and others who post here) refuse to believe that the majority of you ilk are foaming-at-the-mouth hate-filled lunatics, just because YOU claim not to be like them. I added that to answer your predictable question.

I sincerely hope that the majority of 'us ilk' are not foamin-at-the-mouth hate-filled lunatics. And seriously, I've seen several examples of that here. You yourself aren't exactly a peaceful person now, are you?

So, if I were you, I'd start considering forcing them to change their medieval law. Or at least, make sure they do not win and so, impose them on us.

I do not believe that that would be right. I have a question I would like to ask (I also finally managed to put it into words today): Would you rather do something that completely goes against all your senses of right and wrong so that you could survive, or would you die knowing that at least you did not do anything you considered immoral?

You are so predictable, Borgia.

Ah, but I'm not. Am I right-wing? Am I left wing? Communist? Fascist? My viewpoint changes like the wind with every post.

[kkkron]

What is YOUR solution to the problem? Yes, I MAY debate the answer depending on what it may be.

As Borgia said.

[kkkron]

Don't tell an Oregonian the Nazies are gone, I won't believe till I stop seeing their dispicable symbols go up everywhere. No, they're alive, just not as well as they use to be.

In Germany it's worse. They even have a Nazi festival every year in some city (I think Munich in remembrance of the Beer Hall Putsch) and the Nazis have managed to cleverly make sure that they don't do anything illegal under German law, and even manage to get police protection. It scares me that not everyone who believes in Nazism is a skinhead. they have lawyers and intellectuals at those meetings too.[/quote]

[Wyatt_Junker]

In now way did the Nazis invent anti-Semitism. No way in Hell did the Nazis invent it.

No, but they nearly perfected it.


Ah, but I'm not. Am I right-wing? Am I left wing? Communist? Fascist? My viewpoint changes like the wind with every post.

I hear bisexuals suffer from the same dilemma.

[kkkron]

I hear bisexuals suffer from the same dilemma.

I always thought they just didn't mind who they had sex with. Modern Western Society's motto: Sex is fun!

[Black Phoenix]

As long as the <STRIKE>spice</STRIKE> oil flows, we are happy. AS years progressed, we have become more dependent on oil. We have plenty of troops all around the world that are stationed in places with no regard to oil. Each place has its own reason. It would be illogical to think that oil could not be a reason for Iraq based on other areas. Nobody is saying that ALL conflicts are due to oil. If someone asserted that then you would have a case for your argument above.

Taking oil as spoils for the war would make us look like looters and certainly would make it next to impossible to reform Iraq successfully. Further, other nations would scream bloody murder.

Again, we don't need to take it, as long as we get to buy it.


I thought the trade embargos between the US and Iraq before the war were US imposed. At that rate we could have just lifted them, no doubt Saddam wanted to trade with the defacto richest and most powerful nation on the planet.

So, we didn't take the oil, we didn't trade for the oil, our forces don't extend more gaurd for oil than anything else, we didn't cut underhanded deals for oil as was common for other members of the UN, we set up oil for Iraq before setting up any trade that we could participate in, again, we took none... but yea the whole thing just had to be over oil... also, you never answered why if we're so die hard in love with oil, we're not taking more of it from our own land. And again, I think it is significant to show that no, oil doesn't play a major factor in other wars, so why would it in this one? Agreed, oil may weasel it's way in to play a role, but never does it become the dominant cause.

[Wyatt_Junker]

What is YOUR solution to the problem? Yes, I MAY debate the answer depending on what it may be.

My solution would be a 3 state Iraq. The North: Kurds. The South: Sunnis. The Middle: Shiites.

Now, leave U.S. troops in the North and South. Let the newly minted Shia middle province sweat bricks. Let them do mad mullah dance moves.

Question. Has anyone played Jenga?

http://www.rebel.pl/repository/thumbnails/jenga.14944.140x.jpg

Pretend that those blocks that are being lifted up and carefully balanced on one another are a civilization.

http://www.needlenose.com/i/swopa/Jenga.jpg

Let the Iranian-led Shia Pets pretend themselves into believing that they are actually building a new Islamic society that will mushroom into a new dawn, the tallest muslim achievment since the 7th Century.

Now, see this guy?

http://www.matthewweathers.com/year2003/jan2003/home/jenga.jpg

He thinks he's sly. See how he reaches around the side like that?

Guess who that is?

That's Iran.

So...

... what's my point here?

The moment Iran starts to prop up the middle Shia Iraqi province, inserting its mullah-like dictate into the region and it starts to spill either up into the north and south, then guess what happens?

http://www.jsandp.co.uk/images/art/jenga.jpg

We knock them down.

Its pretty simple really.

In fact, its so simple we could do this to any M.E. bullshit.

Withdraw our troops out of harm's way. Let the mullahs pretend they're king shit co-cheese.

Then, the moment it gets imflammatory, knock them the *** down again.

Each time, harder than the first.

You do it to Afghanistan. You do it to Iraq. You do it to Iran. Yo do it to Syria. You do it just like Israel is doing to Lebanon. You knock them down. Withdraw. Let the enemy contract. Then slaughter them incrementally. Do not build up their infrastructure again. Do not invest in them. Do not save them from 'civil war'.

Let them gain their footing. Let them rise up. Then, bring the hammer down. Take out their nuclear reactors. Make their bunkers glow. Destroy bridges. Ruin roads and raze skylines. Turn it into a game. And remember, always have fun.

That's why they call it Jenga.

The entire family can enjoy it.

[Wyatt_Junker]

I always thought they just didn't mind who they had sex with. Modern Western Society's motto: Sex is fun!

Tell that to the spoogemopper at Lonnie's Biscuit Shop.

[Trevelyan]

Oh, of course. I forgot that liberals are so literal. If you tell them 'I worked like a dog,' they wonder why you didn't bark it. :rolleyes:

Well, I did not see anything in your initial post that would suggest you did not actually want anyone to respond to the questions you posed.


How many do you need?

You don't get out much, do you?

I do not know what the situation in Maine is like, but based on my experiences in the area of Pennsylvania I live in, and from conversing with others on various forums, I can say that the only time I have heard from individuals that would fit your descriptions would have to be either on various cable news programs, or from articles posted on this forum.

[Naturalized-Texan]

I do not know what the situation in Maine is like, but based on my experiences in the area of Pennsylvania I live in, and from conversing with others on various forums, I can say that the only time I have heard from individuals that would fit your descriptions would have to be either on various cable news programs, or from articles posted on this forum.
Isn't the hate-America, pro-terrorist traitor, John Murtha, from your area? His office is in Johnstown. PA.

Murtha fits Maggie's description perfectly.

Diana Irey may very well make him an ex-congressman in the November elections.

[Trevelyan]

Isn't the hate-America, pro-terrorist traitor, John Murtha, from your area? His office is in Johnstown. PA.


I've never met or spoken with Murtha, so he would fit under the category of people I have seen on cable news shows.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Spin! Spin! You're spinning like a top!

[Trevelyan]

Spin! Spin! You're spinning like a top!

Oh, so one person represents the collective views of the area in which I live, despite the fact I do not know anyone personally who thinks these people are not terrorists, that America deserves this, and that the Holocaust never happened? (Something I've never heard Murtha weigh in on anyway)

[Maggie_T]

In now way did the Nazis invent anti-Semitism. No way in Hell did the Nazis invent it.

That is the most idiotic thing I've ever heard in my life.

Who said anything about anyone "inventing" anti-Semitism? Nazis didn't invent anti-semitism, but they certainly glorified it. Nazis killed 11 million people, 6 million of those were Jews. Is that not enough to horrify you, kron? How many do you need? Or would you only protest if they were dark-skinned Islamofascists?

Up to this day, Naziism is considered the equivalent to anti-Semitism. Are you going to deny that?

And by the way, why are you answering Borgia's posts? I was posting in reply to him. Where do you come butting in?

You want to destroy them without even learning why they are fighting you? In my book, that's just wrong. My morals say so. It's like telling me the sky is green. It just doesn't compute.

It's not a matter of computing, it's a matter of survival. If you want to go and ask Islamofascists why they hate you, be my guest. All I know is that the bastards want to kill me because I'm American and they hate Americans. That's enough for me. I don't care why they hate Americans. The fact that they hate me enough to kill me without even knowing me is what is VERY wrong in my book. My morals say that no one has the right to kill someone on sight because they belong to a country one hates.

But I see that multiculturalism trumps anything else in your "book." You're willing to grovel at their feet and beg them not to hate you. I never heard of such imbecility in my life. You must be suicidal. Which is fine by me, if that is the way you want to go. But I take a very dim view of your wanting to drag me and everyone else along with you.

They do have legitimate points. The government does have motives for making up a threat like this. Past governments have been known to make up events, especially during wartime. The fact that I do not believe this to be the case does not mean that it isn't the case. However, I would like to see them produce a rational argument and evidence blah, blah, blah ...

Rational arguments?! After posting that muck you talk about rational arguments?!

Tell me, kron. Why is it that you doubt only Western governments? Why are you so willing to concede "legitimate points" even where there are none? Are you so rotted with White Guilt that you instantly dismiss a whole plot to carry out another 9/11 as a made-up lie by Western governments? So in your opinion, it's all a racist, discriminating lie concocted by the British and American governments against the poor oppressed Islamofascists, is it?

You disgust me. You really do. I guess you are one of those Brits who go about calling Melanie Phillips, the author of Londonistan, a racist bigot, and her book "a pack of lies" for the only reason that she dares to acknowledge the enemy.

I sincerely hope that the majority of 'us ilk' are not foaming-at-the-mouth hate-filled lunatics.

No, you are something far worse. You are a fool. A White Guilt-ridden European cretin who's been brainwashed by self-loathing communists into believing that the West is at the root of all evil, and therefore, being a white European, you deserve nothing better than being slaughtered by a bunch of 3rd world barbarians, with a medieval mentality.

You'd be far better off if you actually were a foaming-at-the-mouth lunatic. At least, you'd have a 50-50 chance in the battle against Islamofascists.

And seriously, I've seen several examples of that here. You yourself aren't exactly a peaceful person now, are you?

I certainly am not. I believe in peace through superior strength. If anyone threatens me, my country, my way of life, and/or any of my loved ones, I shoot first and ask questions later.

I don't give a damn in hell why inferior, barbaric, medieval-minded theocrats hate me. All I know is that if they come and try something on me, I won't go without a fight.

I am sick to death of pandering to barbarians. I don't give a damn if they live in backwards undeveloped countries. More often than not, that happens because they allow crazy theocrats with a religious hard on - as my friend Wyatt says - to brainwash and dominate them. Why should I feel guilty of that? The very idea! People have the government they deserve. Why should I feel guilty because some primitive people vote for the likes of Khomeini and Ahmadinejad?

Would you rather do something that completely goes against all your senses of right and wrong so that you could survive, or would you die knowing that at least you did not do anything you considered immoral?

I would rather survive. There's nothing moral in dying of stupidity. It's simply stupid. There. I said it. Start caterwauling, why don't you.

And besides, define immoral. I do not, never will, consider self-defense immoral. Do you consider it immoral for a country to defend itself? What makes that self-defense immoral? The fact that the attackers are dark-skinned 3rd world losers? So for you, it's highly moral to die at the hands of a barbarian who hates you for no other reason than he was brainwashed to hate you? Some Islamic lunatic comes and tells you that you are the reason for all his sufferings and you immediately go into guilt mode and accept that without even a question or thought. You are an evil White European so the barbarian must be right, is that it? It wouldn't be moral for you to defend yourself. No, by dying at the hands of barbarians, you make ... what? some sort of cleansing, "moral" sacrifice?

Well, kron, my man. If you want to immolate yourself on the altar of multiculturalism, and become a martyr for the Islamic cause, by all means, go for it. I am not so keen on allowing lunatic 3rd world theocrats to kill me. You may consider that immoral. Please yourself. I consider your "morality" suicidal, extremely foolish, and deserving of the sort of "punishment" you so desperately seem to seek at the hands of Islamofascists.

[DesertFox]

I don't need to "learn" -- again -- why Islamic "fighters" are "fighting" me. They want me dead and will do what it takes to get me that way. That's really all I need to know.

Now, I understand that other people's "morals" require that they go ahead and DIE before they "learn" why Islamic "fighters" are killing them. I respect their *cough* courage and *shudder* nobility. They are just better people than I am, I guess.

But my dog still loves me. And my cat -- at feeding time, anyways.

I know it's weird, I agree it's odd and I don't know why I'm so strange that way, but I really don't think I need to die in order to grasp their point. I know they hate me. I know they want to kill me. I know they'll do it if they can. Simpleton that I am, that's enough for me.

:rolleyes:

[Lubbock]

History lesson for the Libs who do not see the correlation between Nazi Germany/Hitler and Islamonazis: Hitler's plan was to conquer the world --not just kill Jews and take Europe. Once he got Europe under his thumb, he fully intended to come right on across the Big Pond and take the US.

You bunch of dummys better wise up real quick and get on the bandwagon.

There is only one way this War on Terror is ever going to end: with the death of a few million Muslims --MUSLIMS --that includes "innocent" women and children.

So you Libs might as well get ready for it. Buckle your seat belts, because it going to be a bumpy ride when it starts. Much more like what we've witnessed in the last couple of days, and it's apt to come a lot sooner than any of us think.

[Black Phoenix]

Kron... we don't need to know MORE about their motives. What we already know is enough for me. They want Jihad! They want world conquest.

Have you ever wondered, if this is all targeted at western government, why is it pretty much EVERY civilization that comes in contact with the Islamists eventually ends up viewing them as exteremists? In the end, multiculturalism would lead you to believe the Arabs are nuts. Listen to the Europeans when the muslims terrorize the French and bomb the British. Listen to Arabs as they are enslaved, raped and tortured by their fellow citizens. Ask the Russians who have been hunting their own terrorists for years. Ask those in northern Africa... oh excuse me, since many of them are concured and all, and now fear being put to the death for any complaints, talking to you might not be on their to do list. Ask us here in America, we're a culture aren't we? They've been attacking us for generations, and the best justification anyone ever comes up with is a arguement over oil rights. Ask democrat president Clinton, who attacked Arab nations during his presidency, Iraq in particular. Ask republican former President Bush who also had to declare war on Iraq. Ask those in <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comhttp://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/ /><st1:country-region w:st=Kuwait about their opinion of those who tried to over take them. Ask the Jews who live day in and day out, now with missiles being launched at their houses. Go back in time and ask our own European ansestors why crusades took place. And while your at it, ask the Jews who back then, liked neither side in the Crusades. Go back and speak to the Asian peoples as their countries fell to the sword one by one. </ST1:p</st1:country-region>
<st1:country-region w:st="on"><ST1:p</st1:country-region>
<st1:country-region w:st="on"><ST1:pLet me ask you, which is more likely, that every single culture on this planet has found a way to violate Islam since it's founding, or the Islamists are paranoid, facist and radical?</ST1:p</st1:country-region>

[Beowulf]

Thank you, Borgia, for answering my question. At least one Liberal had the stomach to do it. I'm guessing you will be the only one who does.

Yes, staying the course is the wise answer although I do think we need to re-assess our strategies a bit. Fighting guerilla warfare tactics with conventional means doesn't work well. After all, it wasn't until we started using them with our militia against the British in the Revelutionary War that we started having success against them.

[Maggie_T]

Fox, Lub, Phoenix, it's no good trying to reason with kron. He was very clear: he believes that allowing Islamofascists to slaughter him and the rest of the Western world is a "moral, noble" thing to do (I will never forget this as long as I live).

I'd have absolutely no problem with that if the sorry loser applied that stricly to himself. Problem is, he and his ilk want to drag the rest of us, screaming and kicking, on to the altar of sacrifice next to them.

Looks like we will have to fight these crazy, self-loathing losers along with Islamofacists. It only gets better, doesn't it? :flame:

[markus3622]

"I, me, mine" Markus, the world does not revolve around you. You are not the only liberal in the world. If you want to consider it a coincidence that 99.9% of liberals are in complete disagreement with me and others who think ike me, please yourself.


Uh? I'm not sure how I was meant to realise that when you wrote that you had "some genuine questions for liberals out there", you didn't actually want any liberals to respond to them, unless they were prepared to speak for liberals as a whole, or to confirm what you believed in the first place. You should have sent me some PMs te tell me what to write.

Unless it's not clear, this next part is sarcastic.

Ok, I retract what I said about being opposed to those extreme islamists who want to kill westeners. What I meant to say is that, speaking for all liberals out there, I hate America and I want everyone who isn't a muslim to suffer a horrible death. Allah akbar! Is that better?

[Beowulf]

Hey, Markus, take a crack at my earlier question. What is YOUR solution to the war on terror? Borgia at least responded.

[DoctorDoom]

What is the connection between Nazism and Islamofascism?

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/ArabKampf.jpg">

"This translation of the book My Struggle has never been presented to Arab speakers. It is taken from the original text of the author, Adolf Hitler. The text was untouched by the censor. We made a point to deliver Hitler's opinions and theories on nationalism, regimes, and ethnicity without any changes because they are not yet outmoded and because we, in the Arab world, still proceed haphazardly in all three fields."Hitler's Mein Kampf In East Jerusalem And PA Territories (http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP4899)

It also sells well in other Muzzie areas.

[dPrasse]

Nazi Muslims ...

http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery/thumbnails/Bosnian-Muslims-reading-pro_jpg.jpg

http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery/thumbnails/Bosn%20soldiers_jpg_jpg_jpg.jpg

http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery/images/1-flag_jpg_jpg_jpg.jpg

more here ...
http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery/

[Maggie_T]

Uh? I'm not sure how I was meant to realise that when you wrote that you had "some genuine questions for liberals out there", you didn't actually want any liberals to respond to them, unless they were prepared to speak blah, blah, blah, blah, blah ...


Oh, quit the spin, markus. You're giving me motion sickness.

[dPrasse]

Hitler's Mein Kampf In East Jerusalem And PA Territories (http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP4899)

It also sells well in other Muzzie areas.

I hear it is selling well in London , also ... and a best seller in Turkey ...

[Gonzo67]

Well, I am neither a "Liberal", nor am I a "Conservative". I don't follow any "titles", so I guess I'll provide answers that represent an "Undefined Entity".

I know your questions were posed to the "Admitted Liberals", but I want to answer if for nothing else than to see how my opinion stacks up to either side of the equation.


First of all, considering you are the ones who go about with bumper stickers that read "An eye for an eye only leaves people blind," how do you justify Islamofascists - and other assorted anti-America cults - doing exactly that because we support Israel, or because they hate us. Or do you give terrorists a special pass? And if you do, why? Why do they have the right to vengeance, while white Westeners and Israelis have to bow their head in submission, and allow the Ahmadinejads of this world blow them into eternity?


Well, this one is not really applicable to me, as I neither "justify" them nor give them special pass. Admittedly, I advocate the whole sale slaughter of these maniacal extremists. I would love nothing more to see their headless corpses displayed out in th street, in order of height (minus the head of course) much the same way of the cell phone "how many bars do you have" commercials. As a matter of fact, I think Cingular should consider using images such as that in their next cell phone campaign.

You will NEVER see me bowing my head or cowering in fear or shame at the plight of these people. A plight which is SELF inflicted. They are all beneath me, and I will piss and dance on their graves, and feel damn good about doing it.


In the second place, if - like the "teacher" said - terrorists hate us and want to kill us because "we did some very bad things in the past," does that mean that I can go about blowing up Germans because of what they did during WWII? Because they did some very bad things at that time, you know. Went about rounding up people they did not like and turning them to ashes in ovens, and suffocating them in gas chambers. I hate that. Can't have that. I'm really angry at the bastards for what they did in the past. So. Can I go and let off bombs in German towns because of "the bad things they did in the past?" Well, why not? How is my anger less genuine than that of Islamofascist terrorists?

Oh, so you don't belive the Holocaust really happened? Ok, let's try something else. Let's go back to Pearl Harbor. Now, at the time we were not at war with anyone, not even the Nazis. Yet, one fine day, out of nowhere, here come a bunch of Japanese planes and start dropping bombs on Pearl Harbor like April rain. Which caused us in due time to drop the Big One on them, reducing two of their towns to parking lots. Teach them.


Ok, your next question has far too many points. But I'll do my best.

First, the German people in general were not the culprits in the matte of the Holocaust. That was the Nazi party. Yes, there was a portion of the German civilian population that supported the Nazi party, but there was also a LARGE portion of the German population who only "existed under Nazi rule". To speak out against the Nazi party publicly was to commit yourself to torture and death.

And yes you can offer the argument that even "silent, unwilling obedience" is shameful, I would also offer the counter argument, asking you to explain the Holocaust deaths.

Here we have detention camps, or "Death Camps" if you prefer, nd I agree that is exactly what they were. But in these "camps", the prisoners far outnumbered the captors. The prisoners were stood in a line in front of a pit that was half filled wit corpses of fellow prisoners, and a lone soldier walked up and shot them one at time in the back of the head.

Prisoners were led "en-mass" into showers, where they were systematically destroyed, as were many prisoners before them.

So I ask you, how was this allowed to happen?

I can only offer you MY perspective on what I would have done in their place. If I am standing in a line, and I see people in that line being hot, one at a time, in the back of the head, I can safely assume that when the soldier reaches me, he intends to put one in my head as well. So I can guarantee you, if I am going to die, and I KNOW I am going to die, I will do my best to take that gun, nd take that soldier, and as many more soldiers s I can, straight into that pit with me.

Now this "Camp" had prisoners far outnumbering the captors, I ask you again, WHY was this allowed to take place? Yes, if the prisoners has stood up and ATTEMPTED to preserve their lives, they may very well have been killed. But they're going to be killed anyway.

Do I make excuses for the Nazi party? No. They are guilty of atrocities. Do I lay the blame solely on the Nazi party? NO! While it's true they are guilty of crimes. It's EQUALLY true that the prisoners in that camp are guilty of ALLOWING themselves to be slaughtered without resistance.

Yes I feel sorry for what happened to them. But I understand they ALSO share a small measure of guilt in what happened. Yes, fighting back may well have gotten them killed. But it would have been an honorable death. It would NOT have been defeat ending in death. Those prisoners died long before a Nazi pulled the trigger on them. They gave up, they allowed themselves to be slaughtered like sheep. If you're not willing to fight for your OWN survival, how can you expect others to sacrifice themselves in an attempt to save you?


Now, I know that you peaceniks shudder and go on stress-induced tofu binges at the memory of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But why? What they did to us in Pearl Harbor was a very bad thing. Very bad thing, indeed. We were minding our own business and they showered bombs on us. So, according to this "teacher" credo, we had the right to "return the gesture" and hate the Japs because they did a very bad thing in the past, right?


This is an instance I can see and sort of agree with BOTH sides of the argument.

While I agree that the actions at Pearl Harbor was "unwarranted" and an act that RIGHTFULLY forced us into the war, I can also see the point of the "peacenicks" as you call them, in opposition to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The bombing of Pearl arbor was a bombing of a MILITARY base. It was a Military target.

Our response was a targeting of entire cities. Not just "military" targets, but Civilian targets as well. To level entire cities is to willfully level schools, churches, hospitals, grocery stores, EVERYTHING. KNOWINGLY targeting innocent women, children, elderly, teachers, priests, and even Japanese civilians that may have been protesting in the streets AGAINST their own governments actions against us.

Now, do not take this to mean that I oppose what we did. I do not. I am of the mind set that we were attacked, unprovoked, and we retaliated. Granted, we may have retaliated a bit "more than was called for", but it was an effective demonstration of our resolve and determination to protect our country and our people.

My only point in this matter is that I UNDERSTAND where BOTH sides are coming from, and BOTH sides make good arguments. It all comes down to what you are willing to accept and tolerate.


Another question I have for you is, do actually want the Western world to be blown up by Islamofascist terrorists? I merely ask because you all go out of your way to undermine the war on terror. You go on endless protest marches, waving signs that read "We support our troops only if they kill their generals" (BTW, I thought you hated killings of any sort). You worship Cindy Sheehan. You kick up a tantrum and demand "rights" for those who fly planes into our buildings, killing thousands. Your representatives in Congress go on endless tirades against Bush. You know. "Bush is a Nazi!" "Bush is a terrorist!" "Bush lied to us!" (I thought you didn't mind if presidents fibbed now and then ... ok, never mind). Stuff like that. Every single day of the week. You just kicked a long-time liberal senator in the butt because he supports the war on terror.


Well, for my part, I support the war. I supported it when it started. The first news report I saw of those planes hitting the tower, it was my explicit wish that the entire country that those pricks were from, would be eradicated from the face of this planet, down to the last man, woman, child, and gold-fish.

The one thing I did NOT support was the "label" given to the war. "War on terror". It was NEVER a "War On Terror". And before you jump the gun, no, I do NOT believe it to be a "War for Oil" either. It is EXACTLY what Bush has finally called it. We are at war with Islamic Fascists. We are at war with the Nation Of Islam. And the sooner people are willing to call a spade a spade and IDENTIFY our "enemies", the sooner we can do what needs to be done.

Clever little euphemisms are NOT going to save us. Calling Muslim suspects "individuals of possible Pakistani descent" is NOT going to make the enemy happy. They are out to kill us. period. They want us dead. And it's simply a matter of, "are we willing to kill them before the kill us?" Well, I am.


Not meaning to start a fight with you, but I cannot help but think that you probably believe the Western world deserves what it's getting at the hands of Islamofascists. Yeah, let them kill all white Westeners! Bloody bastards deseve no less. Of course, that begs the question, and what about you? Because Islamofascists will come after you, too, you know ... unless of course, you got some sort of agreement with them that we lesser mortals know nothing of.


I agree wit you here without question. Those that want to placate these murdering assholes, they get not an OUNCE of sympathy from me when they lay beheaded in the street. These radicals want ALL "non-Muslims" dead. Just because you felt "sorry" for them, do NOT for one minute entertain the fantasy that when thy walk down your street, you will be spared. That will NOT happen. You are white. You are non Muslim. That is ALL the reason they need to kill you. They care NOTHING for your political ideologies. They care NOTHING about the anti-American, anti-war protest signs you have in your yard. You are an American. You are an enemy. Your blood will be spilled just as quickly as your neighbors. And when that happens, I will NOT shed a single tear for you. In my eyes, you got nothing more than you deserved. And your corpse will rot and decay quicker than the bodies of those that fight to defend our country. Those that stand up for this country will be remembered. Those that oppose or would bring about the destruction of our country from withing, won't be remembered. Because they are not WORTH remembering.


Are you willing do die for that "redemption"? Or are you just willing to let other people die for it, while you "reap the benefits," so to speak?


Not before, not now, not ever! I served my country, and if they would take me now, at my age, and put a gun in my hand, I would GLADLY go fight beside the people who recurrently fighting for us now.

If thee comes a time when the Muslims walk down the streets of our cities and towns, you can rest assured that I will be in those streets as well. Killing as many Muslims as I can up until they kill me. And I would do it without regret, without remorse, and with the FULL KNOWLEDGE that i was doing so in defense of my family, friends, and country.

And anyone not willing to stand up and fight for themselves, they do not DESERVE to call themselves an American.


I ask all these questions, because I simply cannot understand your behavior of late. Is your thirst for power so strong that you are willing to aid and abet the enemy, an enemy that hates you as much as they hate your president (but then again, you hate him, too, don't you?) I guess as long as you end up in charge, you don't mind how many innocent people die (you, who bleat about the innocent dead in Iraq). The important thing is to defeat Republicans/conservatives and get a liberal back in the White House at any cost, right?


What people like that feel to consider is that they will NEVER be in power. If they get their way, and we become a Muslim run state, they will be laid in a shallow grave right along side those that opposed them.

But your "Republican / Democrat" analogy works both ways. Politics in this country have been turned into a game, and the "two party system" is a complete joke.

The Democrats write a bill, and republicans oppose it. Not because it's an unjust bill, but because the Democrats wrote it. And likewise, the Republicans come up with THEIR version of the bill, and the Democrats automatically oppose it. not because it would destroy the rights of the people, but because Republicans wrote it.

The Democrats re not concerned with the people they represent. They are only concerned that they get more "points" than the Republicans.

The Republicans don't give a shit about the people they represent. They are only concerned with getting one up on the Democrats.

So which party is better? Neither one. They are BOTH populated with self serving bastards who's ONLY intention as politicians is to make as much money as they possibly can before we, the people who put these assholes in charge, find out how corrupt they are and vote for someone else to replace them.

[Rink]

ALL the other employees were saying the EXACT SAME THING: "How do you know it was Islamists?" "How do you know this is real?"


You know whats gonna happen if a Dem gets into office? We will crawl back home and talk endlessly with the bloodthirsty muslims on treaties and peace aqgreements till one day those that asked that question "How do you know it was Islamists?" "How do you know this is real?" will wake up to find Bloodthirsty muslims at their throats killing them and their loved ones in their own country at their own homes, and by that time it will be far far too late to realize it WAS Islamists, it WAS Muslims doing all the killings, bombings, mayhem and terrorism.

Once it threatens them at HOME Then they will come to that wonderful finality, that realization at the moment their heads get lopped off that it was indeed Islamists and Muslim ones at that that wanted them and their own dead.

Our politicians blind themselves insisting on injecting Western Values onto a people who dont, and wont, and never have held 'Western Values' and ideas as WE do to the Middle east.

Trying to 'talk' them out of thei murderous itch to kill that which will not bow their heads to Islam.

Untill it comes home to threaten them in their own countries and their own streets and homes They will ALWAYS be asking those questions that astonished Maggie and Homes.

These kinds of clueless people ascribe western Values and ideology to a people and region that does NOT hold to them or care to even respect those Values and Ideology whatsoever.

[BarkleUSA]

RE:
Well, I am neither a "Liberal", nor am I a "Conservative".

(i.e. I am a liberal in denial)

Do I lay the blame solely on the Nazi party? NO! While it's true they are guilty of crimes. It's EQUALLY true that the prisoners in that camp are guilty of ALLOWING themselves to be slaughtered without resistance.

J’ever hear of Warsaw? And the Jews going into the gas chamber believed they were being deloused. It wasn’t until the iron door was locked and the cyclone-B released that they knew what was coming.

To level entire cities is to willfully level schools, churches, hospitals, grocery stores, EVERYTHING. KNOWINGLY targeting innocent women, children, elderly, teachers, priests, and even Japanese civilians that may have been protesting in the streets AGAINST their own governments actions against us.

Umm, guess you don’t get the whole concept of war. The idea is to break the will of your opponent to resist as he tries to break yours – not to “play fair” and drag it out accepting casualties making sure that your casualties match theirs. The Islamo-fascists understand this and are waging unconditional war with the west and would not hesitate to nuke our cities if they had the wherewithal.

Here there are many plausible scenarios:


Iran succeeds in developing a nuke.
Kim Ill gets bored with these useless six party talks.
Russia decides it’s in their interest to “misplace” some of their nukes.
The Islamo-fascists decide they’ve had enough of Musheriff in Pakistan.
The French are offered a deal they can’t refuse.
This is more like the cold war now, each side fighting through proxy with measured escalation. Once a major western city gets nuked, then it will be total war and the gloves come off. At that point, the enemy will be quickly dispatched, millions will have died, and history will have repeated itself yet once again.

And invariably, a few generations later people like you will once again pontificate about humanity, fairness, leveling of cities and seeing both sides of everything as if all sides are equal. God Help Us.

[Gonzo67]

ROFL Barky... Why don't you take your little fingers, place them on your mouse wheel and scroll your self righteous ass back up and actually READ my post before you ATTEMPT to think you know me. Your half ass perusal and systematic picking out of little snippets and WARPING what I said is comical at best.


(i.e. I am a liberal in denial)


Guess again Scooter.


J’ever hear of Warsaw? And the Jews going into the gas chamber believed they were being deloused. It wasn’t until the iron door was locked and the cyclone-B released that they knew what was coming.


Ok, so you know for a fact they had no warning what so ever. I'll go with ya and assume you're 100% correct in this point. So, would you care to comment on the OTHER point? You know, the one with watching 30 or 40 people get shot in line one at a time, and NOT ONE of them taking the gun and taking a couple Nazi pricks down with them?

You seem to feel that I am condoning the Nazi assholes. I already stated I deplore what they did. I am simply pointing out the ONLY sane conclusion one can arrive at. I am only pointing out the ONE thing that so many other FC members have stated in so many other threads that you have NEVER tried to slam them on. THEY WENT DOWN WITHOUT A FIGHT. Something MANY people in these forums have stated they would NEVER do. But hey, I know you don't have the balls to bitch at anyone else, so lay into me, I don't give a shit. Your opinion of me matters about as much as bird shit on the roof of my car Chuckles.


Umm, guess you don’t get the whole concept of war. The idea is to break the will of your opponent to resist as he tries to break yours – not to “play fair” and drag it out accepting casualties making sure that your casualties match theirs. The Islamo-fascists understand this and are waging unconditional war with the west and would not hesitate to nuke our cities if they had the wherewithal.


You wanna back the ignorance truck up a bit? How about you go back to my post and quote the part where I said:


Now, do not take this to mean that I oppose what we did. I do not. I am of the mind set that we were attacked, unprovoked, and we retaliated. Granted, we may have retaliated a bit "more than was called for", but it was an effective demonstration of our resolve and determination to protect our country and our people.


Ahhh see there, you just happened to FORGET about that part. Because if you HAD quoted it, then you would not be able to twist my first paragraph and make it appear I was bashing what we did. You would not have been able to spew your self-righteous idiocy and scream that I "don't get it" and attempt to paint me as a "war protesting liberal". Well, not gonna work sunshine. Read THE WHOLE POST, keep shit in context, you'll look less like an ass ramming monkey.


And invariably, a few generations later people like you will once again pontificate about humanity, fairness, leveling of cities and seeing both sides of everything as if all sides are equal. God Help Us.


So what you are saying is that NO ONE should EVER view both sides of the equation before acting? You mean that EVERY situation you have ever dealt with, you just "instinctively" knew which side was right and which side was wrong? Well DAMN MAN! Where the hell have YOU been all our lives! Hell, if we would have known you were THAT great, we could have done away with our whole court system! Why have a judge and jury! Hell, Call Barkless! He knows EVERYTHING without hearing EITHER side of an argument!

If you honestly believe that people should act without hearing as much of the evidence as possible, you're a bigger dumb shit than I thought you were.

Once again Skippy... READ THE ENTIRE POST before you comment on it.<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

[Beowulf]

The French are offered a deal they can’t refuse.

Yeah, so long as they side with whoever is winning, they're happy since they can't win themselves.

[markus3622]

Hey, Markus, take a crack at my earlier question. What is YOUR solution to the war on terror? Borgia at least responded.

Ok, here goes. I'll preface what I say by agreeing broadly with Tony Blair and Goerge Bush that there is a battle between the civilized, liberal world, and Islamic extremism. I also agree with George Bush is that in the Middle East, the solution is democracy and liberalism (in the sense that everyone on this board agrees with, in the original sense - economic freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc).

The invasion of Iraq has been so far been a mistake, and I don't think that Iraq is going to turn into a liberal democracy, in the way that was hoped, at least in the reasonable short term. I think Islam needs a reformation/enlightenment as we saw in the Western world. Islam isn't going to be the spur, but economic growth which will produce a prosperous, educated middle class, who will seek a secular society, that we benefit from in the west.

On to terrorism. There's no simple solution to terrorism. As far as I know, no terrorist group has ever been eradicated by military means alone. There are some in the Middle East that have genuine grievances, and by that, I mean the Palestinians (that's not to say the Israelis take all the blame). There's needs to be serious work to solve the Israeli/Palestine problem. I've heard that someone said that both sides peace, and I think the problem is that both sides want peace that follows a victory. That's not going to happen.

The terror threat that we've seen in the UK in the last few days is ultimately about trying to stop attacks in the short term. We need good intelligence, the groups need to be spied on, etc. We need effective military action that will eliminate terror bases/camps/groups, but we're not going to get rid of terrorists. This part of dealing with terrorists is in effect, a short term, "finger in the dyke" solution while democratisation takes place.

Going full circle, the problem in Northern Ireland hasn't been partially solved by killing all members of the IRA or UDF, but by concessions and economic growth. The Republic of Ireland was traditionally poorer than Ulster. Now it's the other way round. Republicans are now happier with their part of Ireland, rather than fighting over Ulster. The key to the war on terror will be producing a stable, democratic middle east, and I think the long-term answer is economics, not the military. That may mean aiding moderate governments in the region, promoting growth and democracy (like in Turkey).

[Beowulf]

All well and true, Markus, but you can't build a national economy when insurgents keep blowing up pipelines, buildings and other things that a stable economy relies on.
You know as well as I do that if we leave Iraq tomorrow it won't change. Insurgents will continue fighting, vandalizing pipelines, schools and other points of economic value. I don't like the thought of a longer stay over there either but if we leave, it would be far worse.
Oh yeah, having said that, can you imagine how countries like France would react if all of a sudden they had no one over there defending those economic values? They most certainly would point at us and say we need to do something, per usual.

[gnome]

I was late on this one, and then found that many posters already expressed their responses as well as or better than I could.

A couple of things worth saying:

So I'm starting this thread because I have some genuine questions for liberals out there (oh, yes; I know you're lurking).

First of all, considering you are the ones who go about with bumper stickers that read "An eye for an eye only leaves people blind," how do you justify Islamofascists - and other assorted anti-America cults - doing exactly that because we support Israel, or because they hate us. Or do you give terrorists a special pass? And if you do, why? Why do they have the right to vengeance, while white Westeners and Israelis have to bow their head in submission, and allow the Ahmadinejads of this world blow them into eternity?

As ever, I can only speak for myself. I don't have an "eye for an eye" sticker, but it's the sort of thing I might very well put on my car. My answer to your question is that I don't justify it. I think it's murderous villainy, and it is not only right but necessary that we do not submit. I don't see our fighting back as an "eye for an eye" because I don't see it as revenge, I see it as defense.

As a civilized nation, we face the Sisyphean chore of defending ourselves from barbarism and tyranny over and over again... speaking of this struggle as if it would have an end, if only we were ruthless enough, is misguided. Even if we could push a button and eradicate every single militant "death to all infidels" muslim, there will still arise malcontents and terrorists. Sometimes they will band together and require a more organized, intensive effort to fight. But I don't buy in to the idea that our survival requires abandoning restraint.

Our survival will always be in jeapordy. Some may say we don't have the luxury of restraint--just take the gloves off and sock it to them, their women, and their children, and then we can go back to our civilized ways. But that's just it--we will never have the luxury of sitting back, free from all enemies. If we are to preserve our ways, we must find a way to preserve them in the face of adversaries as well as during times of relative peace.

As for the solution to I