BF2S Forums US Troops caught torturing Iraqi Kids.

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

David.P wrote:

(My god ilberals are dumb)

I'm not dumb. That's why I don't have any problems with reading comprehension, as you appear to. See below.

Was'nt talking about you.

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

David.P wrote:

(So you support people spitting on soldiers and disrespecting them?

Never said anything of the sort. You really should quit making up shit like that, just makes you look either foolish or like a liar.

I'm not making up shit, They do wanna surrender American sovereignty and dignity, By trying to play nice with the terrorists.

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

David.P wrote:

You can go ahead and criticize the government, military brass, and anyone other decision maker but never ever insult the grunts!

No one should ever be above criticism. No one. Not in a free society. If they do wrong, people will speak of it and it's not for the likes of you to try and silence it.

Allright fine then criticize the soldiers i dont care anymore but make sure you know what exactly they did in Iraq before you call them "Baby killers" and "Fascists" Go and follow them around for a few months in the hot desert and see things from their point of view, be careful not to get shot by the "poor Iraqi's who are just lashing out because noone listens to them"

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

David.P wrote:

These people have done nothing against you infact they've done so many things for you!

I can't think of how to say this without you taking it the wrong way, reading something into it, or just making shit up out of thin air, so I'll address it directly to the soldiers themselves, whichever ones may be reading this, who are far more fucking important than you will ever be.

...

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

Though I respect those of you who've signed up and are trying the best you can to do the right thing, you're not defending my freedom or really doing anything for me directly. The only people benefiting from your presence, your sacrifice right now are people who aren't fucking worth the grunge on the bottom of your boots. Your dedication to your duty is being used cheaply as are you yourselves. The worst among you are being excused, concealed and coddled by people who worship the uniform and don't give a rusty shit for the flesh and blood inside it.

How do you know that they have'nt killed the master planner of the next attack? And who is benefiting the most from this war?

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

People like DP here, they're not your friends. They support you as long as you continue to do what you're told and you supply them with the occasional bit of cadaver porn they can live vicariously through while you sweat out the reality of bullets and bombs. If you don't quietly follow orders and you speak up about policy you see as wrong, if you come home and they feel that the job isn't done to their satisfaction, they can and will turn on you. They will abandon and forget you like they did the soldiers who fought in Vietnam, who they saw as losers for being defeated by such a "weak" military power. They will angrily tell stories about "hippies" and "liberals" spitting on you when you came home while they pretend not to see your brothers, broken in body and mind, wandering neglected through the streets or begging for spare change so they can buy another bottle of rotgut to chase the memories away.

I am noones friend. I support the soldiers no matter what. Funny if you still dont believe that people actually protested them go ask some vietnam vets and see what they say.

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

For you, the soldiers, the ones doing the job and trying to retain your humanity, the ones not shooting Iraqi civilians and then planting shovels and AK47s on them, the ones just trying to keep yourselves alive in a situation you didn't ask to be in, I respect you and my thoughts and hopes are with you. All I ask in return is that you understand that because of the position the soldier occupies in our society, the power you have over life and death, I will always scrutinize what you do and criticize those I see as wrong. Not because I hate soldiers, but because I know what they're meant to be. Not gods, not flawless heroes, just men and women who defend others from harm.

Really? You sure dont sound like it.

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

David.P wrote:

I see that many people like strykker described are blaming the soldiers because it's easier

The people strykker described in that other thread are fucking idiots. I mean horror-movie-character stupid. But, if you didn't make a disingenuous attempt to equate people like that with people like me, well, it just wouldn't be you.

I know your different you express your views through a mouse and keyboard with coherent words they just rant about everything like me(Monkey see monkey do)

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

David.P wrote:

They cant just walk into a military base point their fingers in the CO's face they'ed be shot! Most lib's are cowards thats why they attack soldiers, Give them a gun and send em off to Iraq what do you think they'll do? Thats right they'll just throw it away and try to reason with the enemy! Soldiers dont talk they fight that kind of work is for  the politicians that bullshit diplomatically handle the enemy.

Rambling, incoherent, contradictory nonsense that I don't even know how to address, especially with you answering your own questions like you're schizophrenic. Seriously, lay off the Robitussin.

It was'nt a question it was hypothetical situation in which i point out the inability of liberals to see things in a real perspective.

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

David.P wrote:

Ya it does kinda suck but what would happen if we let Saudi arabia have california in a fair trade? Maybe then you'll learn to appreciate what you had.

Go ahead, I don't live in California.

Of course it doesn't matter since despite your fevered wishes, you're not in a position to give shit to anyone.

I dont want to give anyland away, Again your inability to grasp this hypothetical situation astounds me(As you claim i am an idiot and your smart)

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

David.P wrote:

So hunter tell your liberal hippie friends to stop going up to soldiers and starting shit or they will regret it later on.

Oh don't you wish. Oh wait, yes you do, now that I recall your little fantasies from strykker's thread.

We all have fantasies it helps us get through life.

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

David.P wrote:

Shit man if i was you i would have lashed out so hard. Fuck i would've been in a paddy wagon for 8 counts of homocide and 1 count of rape.(Ya bimbo i'm talking to you wink Get down and suck it!)

What a charming individual you must be in real life. Real hit with the ladies, I can tell.

Again your powers of not fully understanding what i was trying to do astound me. Want the answer? I was trying to lighten the fucken mood.

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

David.P wrote:

Wait I got a great Idea! Listen man i'm gonna come down there by car(No searches) You just gimme the address of the super market i'll meet up with you at a place of your choosing, Then you'll walk in with a shirt that says Marines i'll come in after you with my dc9 and the first person that says shit will get their ass blasted. /Kidding of course (For now... MWUHUHUHUHUHUHUHUHUHU AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!)

Apparently in Davie's America, people would be summarily executed for speaking out of turn. Where's that guy that was talking about brownshirts before...

Stop taking everything i say at face value.

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

David.P wrote:

Dude want me to come up there and teach em a few things? .45 rounds are cheaper up there(Seems you all prefer 9mm for some reason) So i could use the trip as an excuse for a "resupply run"

Ah, "resupply run", love the pseudo-military speak, makes you sound like a real hardass. Lemme guess, you use words like "sitrep", "AO" and "intel" in regular conversations too don't you.

Actually it was "Gangsta" Which i intimidate to break the ice in conversations.

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

David.P wrote:

I dont take shit from strange people ever!  Like is said, I'm surprised how he handled himself if it was me i'd be in jail.

strykker handled himself like a professional. You would have either not said shit even if you had a mouthful and then seethed over it later complete with the above fantasies about what you'd like to do to them or you'd have taken a swing at someone and ended up both dishonorably discharged and getting your ass recalibrated by your cellmate for the next year or so.

Actually i would have just threatened them like "The FBI knows where you live and they'll tell me" or something else which will make them shut up, I would only get violent if they did first.

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

I'll bet you see yourself as a real tough customer. I'll bet you also don't see how people look at you, a big blowhard parody of the people you claim to support, people who live lives of honor, distinction and duty while you sit safe on the sidelines imagining that you have even an ounce of what it takes to be like them, imagining that you know what honor, distinction and duty even are.

I know i'm not tough infact i'm not even smart i'm just an asshole who likes to piss off people over the internet and in real life anyway i can. I hate libs like you who think the way you do. You let hitler take over europe with appeasement, You let eastern europe suffer under communism for 50 years, You let so many things happen which should'nt.(Not you per se but the liberal minded people that mede the decisions assuming that everything will be A-OK with Germany and later Russia if we just give them what they want they'll leave us alone, And nwow your trying to repeat that again)

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

You've got as much of a grasp on those concepts as a gorilla would on Nietzsche's entire body of work. You're a bully, a brute, someone who would use force to impose his will on other people simply because you could and I thank everything good and decent in this world that you're not a uniformed soldier of this country.

You know you're describing the "Prophet" right? I mean everything he did to gain power is just as you described, Maybe if you were alive back then you would've stopped him but nah people back then we're easily intimidated,  They would have killed you on the spot for slander, Thank god people dont let people like me and him gain power anymore or the world would be fucked, Oh shit wait we have bush, peta, putin, kim jong il, ahmajinadad, osama, etc etc. So ya nevermind.(If you can read between the lines on this last sentence i will be fucken amazed)_

David.P wrote:

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

David.P wrote:

(My god ilberals are dumb)

I'm not dumb. That's why I don't have any problems with reading comprehension, as you appear to. See below.

Was'nt talking about you.

Wow, you really ARE stupid.

You can't generalize an entire group of people, then single out people for exemptions. That's like saying "I hate all mexicans", but when one comes up to you and says "That offends me," you respond "Well, I wasn't talking about you."

Good debate skills.

Smithereener wrote:

David.P wrote:

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

I'll bet you see yourself as a real tough customer. I'll bet you also don't see how people look at you, a big blowhard parody of the people you claim to support, people who live lives of honor, distinction and duty while you sit safe on the sidelines imagining that you have even an ounce of what it takes to be like them, imagining that you know what honor, distinction and duty even are.

I know i'm not tough infact i'm not even smart i'm just an asshole who likes to piss off people over the internet and in real life anyway i can. I hate libs like you who think the way you do. You let hitler take over europe with appeasement, You let eastern europe suffer under communism for 50 years, You let so many things happen which should'nt.(Not you per se but the liberal minded people that mede the decisions assuming that everything will be A-OK with Germany and later Russia if we just give them what they want they'll leave us alone, And nwow your trying to repeat that again)

Neville Chamberlain, the guy who negotiated the appeasement of Hitler, was actually a conservative. Eastern Europe suffered under Communism because the Soviet Union had a tight grasp on them. Blame the liberals for not wanting another major war right after WWII? That's outrageous. Not the mention that Harry Truman (Democrat, but you know, Democrat=liberal right?) had a part in the Marshall Plan, which helped rebuilt Europe after WWII, preventing Communist sentiment from pervading too much, and the Truman Doctrine, which contained Communism, and NATO. But, pffft, he didn't do anything to rid/stop Communism right? Yeah, that war in my home country during his presidency had nothing to do with Communism. Let's look at the next President during the Cold War - Dwight D. Eisenhower. (Republican, which means he was conservative) Oh yeah, he's conservative, that means he didn't let Eastern Europe suffer under the Soviet Union. Oh wait, it's not 1991 yet. Whoops. Seriously (I'll say this again), this whole hatred of liberals and conservatives is total bollocks that detracts from the potential solutions to problems plaguing our society.

Please, no more of this in at least this thread...

Nah ill keep pissing you bastard sell outs some more.

Edit: Did'nt the people generalize strykker? So if libs do it cant I?

Last edited by David.P (2007-07-29 11:19:28)

David.P wrote:

Smithereener wrote:

David.P wrote:

I know i'm not tough infact i'm not even smart i'm just an asshole who likes to piss off people over the internet and in real life anyway i can. I hate libs like you who think the way you do. You let hitler take over europe with appeasement, You let eastern europe suffer under communism for 50 years, You let so many things happen which should'nt.(Not you per se but the liberal minded people that mede the decisions assuming that everything will be A-OK with Germany and later Russia if we just give them what they want they'll leave us alone, And nwow your trying to repeat that again)

Neville Chamberlain, the guy who negotiated the appeasement of Hitler, was actually a conservative. Eastern Europe suffered under Communism because the Soviet Union had a tight grasp on them. Blame the liberals for not wanting another major war right after WWII? That's outrageous. Not the mention that Harry Truman (Democrat, but you know, Democrat=liberal right?) had a part in the Marshall Plan, which helped rebuilt Europe after WWII, preventing Communist sentiment from pervading too much, and the Truman Doctrine, which contained Communism, and NATO. But, pffft, he didn't do anything to rid/stop Communism right? Yeah, that war in my home country during his presidency had nothing to do with Communism. Let's look at the next President during the Cold War - Dwight D. Eisenhower. (Republican, which means he was conservative) Oh yeah, he's conservative, that means he didn't let Eastern Europe suffer under the Soviet Union. Oh wait, it's not 1991 yet. Whoops. Seriously (I'll say this again), this whole hatred of liberals and conservatives is total bollocks that detracts from the potential solutions to problems plaguing our society.

Please, no more of this in at least this thread...

Nah ill keep pissing you bastard sell outs some more.

Edit: Did'nt the people generalize strykker? So if libs do it cant I?

That's only going to ruin this thread faster... Seriously, no more.

Smithereener wrote:

Neville Chamberlain, the guy who negotiated the appeasement of Hitler, was actually a conservative. Eastern Europe suffered under Communism because the Soviet Union had a tight grasp on them. Blame the liberals for not wanting another major war right after WWII? That's outrageous. Not the mention that Harry Truman (Democrat, but you know, Democrat=liberal right?) had a part in the Marshall Plan, which helped rebuilt Europe after WWII, preventing Communist sentiment from pervading too much, and the Truman Doctrine, which contained Communism, and NATO. But, pffft, he didn't do anything to rid/stop Communism right? Yeah, that war in my home country during his presidency had nothing to do with Communism. Let's look at the next President during the Cold War - Dwight D. Eisenhower. (Republican, which means he was conservative) Oh yeah, he's conservative, that means he didn't let Eastern Europe suffer under the Soviet Union. Oh wait, it's not 1991 yet. Whoops. Seriously (I'll say this again), this whole hatred of liberals and conservatives is total bollocks that detracts from the potential solutions to problems plaguing our society.

owned again. david should better stfu...

David.P wrote:

I know i'm not tough infact i'm not even smart i'm just an asshole who likes to piss off people

so true...

Mystline wrote:

LOL look at the soldier in the background, he's like fuck yeah!

See what he's carrying? Soccer ball confiscation detail. He's just glad he got out alive.

[pt] KEIOS wrote:

Smithereener wrote:

Neville Chamberlain, the guy who negotiated the appeasement of Hitler, was actually a conservative. Eastern Europe suffered under Communism because the Soviet Union had a tight grasp on them. Blame the liberals for not wanting another major war right after WWII? That's outrageous. Not the mention that Harry Truman (Democrat, but you know, Democrat=liberal right?) had a part in the Marshall Plan, which helped rebuilt Europe after WWII, preventing Communist sentiment from pervading too much, and the Truman Doctrine, which contained Communism, and NATO. But, pffft, he didn't do anything to rid/stop Communism right? Yeah, that war in my home country during his presidency had nothing to do with Communism. Let's look at the next President during the Cold War - Dwight D. Eisenhower. (Republican, which means he was conservative) Oh yeah, he's conservative, that means he didn't let Eastern Europe suffer under the Soviet Union. Oh wait, it's not 1991 yet. Whoops. Seriously (I'll say this again), this whole hatred of liberals and conservatives is total bollocks that detracts from the potential solutions to problems plaguing our society.

owned again. david should better stfu...

No! Libs can let any minority have what they want but they wont let me say what i want? Fuck you left wing! I'll say what i want! I hate feminists!

usmarine2005 wrote:

Lies.  Jewish propaganda.

blisteringsilence wrote:

Smithereener wrote:

Neville Chamberlain, the guy who negotiated the appeasement of Hitler, was actually a conservative. Eastern Europe suffered under Communism because the Soviet Union had a tight grasp on them. Blame the liberals for not wanting another major war right after WWII? That's outrageous. Not the mention that Harry Truman (Democrat, but you know, Democrat=liberal right?) had a part in the Marshall Plan, which helped rebuilt Europe after WWII, preventing Communist sentiment from pervading too much, and the Truman Doctrine, which contained Communism, and NATO. But, pffft, he didn't do anything to rid/stop Communism right? Yeah, that war in my home country during his presidency had nothing to do with Communism. Let's look at the next President during the Cold War - Dwight D. Eisenhower. (Republican, which means he was conservative) Oh yeah, he's conservative, that means he didn't let Eastern Europe suffer under the Soviet Union. Oh wait, it's not 1991 yet. Whoops. Seriously (I'll say this again), this whole hatred of liberals and conservatives is total bollocks that detracts from the potential solutions to problems plaguing our society.

Please, no more of this in at least this thread...

You are trying to compare a democrat of 1945 to a democrat of today, as well as a republican of 1953 to one of today. It doesn't work like that. The terms liberal and conserative, which are so bandied about today, have no historical associations with Republican and Democratic parties. Lincoln's republicans have nothing to do with Eisenhower's republicans, and even less to do with Bush's republicans. The same can be said for the democratic party through time.

Yeah, that was just a play on the whole notion a lot of us seem have. I do realize that parties do change over time, but Liberals are always associated with being Democrats and conservatives are associated with being Republicans on this forum...

Edit: Hmm, guessing DP didn't get this post or just skimmed right over it.

Last edited by Smithereener (2007-07-29 13:22:21)

blisteringsilence wrote:

Smithereener wrote:

Neville Chamberlain, the guy who negotiated the appeasement of Hitler, was actually a conservative. Eastern Europe suffered under Communism because the Soviet Union had a tight grasp on them. Blame the liberals for not wanting another major war right after WWII? That's outrageous. Not the mention that Harry Truman (Democrat, but you know, Democrat=liberal right?) had a part in the Marshall Plan, which helped rebuilt Europe after WWII, preventing Communist sentiment from pervading too much, and the Truman Doctrine, which contained Communism, and NATO. But, pffft, he didn't do anything to rid/stop Communism right? Yeah, that war in my home country during his presidency had nothing to do with Communism. Let's look at the next President during the Cold War - Dwight D. Eisenhower. (Republican, which means he was conservative) Oh yeah, he's conservative, that means he didn't let Eastern Europe suffer under the Soviet Union. Oh wait, it's not 1991 yet. Whoops. Seriously (I'll say this again), this whole hatred of liberals and conservatives is total bollocks that detracts from the potential solutions to problems plaguing our society.

Please, no more of this in at least this thread...

You are trying to compare a democrat of 1945 to a democrat of today, as well as a republican of 1953 to one of today. It doesn't work like that. The terms liberal and conserative, which are so bandied about today, have no historical associations with Republican and Democratic parties. Lincoln's republicans have nothing to do with Eisenhower's republicans, and even less to do with Bush's republicans. The same can be said for the democratic party through time.

Oh my god he actually gets it! I hate the liberal mindset! Thats what i've been saying and noone understood it! Bravo +1 when it recharges.

Spark wrote:

You hate 'liberals' yet I'd be willing to bet money that you couldn't actually define the word in any meaningful manner (apart from putting in a few general insults against people you hate in general)

Liberal: a individual with tendencies towards individual thought. Wiki definition

Now you define conservative.

David.P wrote:

Spark wrote:

You hate 'liberals' yet I'd be willing to bet money that you couldn't actually define the word in any meaningful manner (apart from putting in a few general insults against people you hate in general)

Liberal: a individual with tendencies towards individual thought. Wiki definition

Now you define conservative.

Oh, if we want to pull things straight from wiki rather than actually thinking of our own definitions...