lolz
Calm down NancyFEOS wrote:
You have no idea what you're talking about.
So you have to be coerced into doing the morally right thing? OK.I have to take training, sign paperwork, and fill out financial disclosure forms every year because of the laws I mentioned.
So it does happen, people are morally bankrupt and do get caught on a regular basis? Thank you for proving my point.Because people go to jail regularly for violating the laws involved. And you're squawking about "moral bankruptcy."
Just pointing out that the head of your CIA was doing something which would be considered unacceptable in most developed countries. With liberal freedoms come personal responsibilities based on morals - this is why 'Libertarianism' can't work in your country - its morally bankrupt and everyones out for themselves.You have no argument, so you equate a few to the entirety of the population--a classic argument failure.
I'm not implying he did anything, see above.And the guy in question didn't even do what you're implying...
Protip: Talk a long bath when you get back from the beach.you've gone off on another (wrong) tangent entirely. And when called on it for its utter wrongness, all you've got is that "moral bankruptcy" nonsense, as if you're somehow morally superior.
Hogwash.
Fuck Israel
You know, for a moment there I thought you were talking about an actual animal ie. dog/cat there. Yes, that did make it seem a bit strange...Hurricane2k9 wrote:
god I hate how fucking liberal Maryland is sometimes. this shouldn't be up for debate, this animal should be locked up for life WITHOUT parole:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/cri … story.html
I actually attended one of the days of the trial. She had absolutely no remorse. God only in this backwards fucking state would someone try and argue that she shouldn't get life without parole. If this had happened in neighboring Virginia she'd already be on death row.No it would NOT be better for the community you dumb fucking bleeding heart.“A sentence of life without the possibility of parole is a sentence of death by incarceration which is uncalled for in this case,” Wood said in an e-mail. “The community would be better served by a sentence that gives her the possibility of parole.”
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
The only chip on my shoulder is against intellectual dishonesty.AussieReaper wrote:
Knowing full well you have a chip on your shoulder so didn't read what I wrote.Feos wrote:
So you say "were Bush's wars" knowing full well the Obama Administration/Democrat/Blame Bush crowd's penchant for refusing to take responsibility for anything, laying all wrongs at the feet of an administration that has had no say for over three years in the governance of this country. Forgive me if I had to deal with reality, rather than nuance, in my response.
They are not "talking up starting a war with Iran." Saying that military options are not off the table and that it may come to military strikes to disable Iran's nuclear capability is NOT the same thing as "starting a war with Iran." The fact that you have such a narrow view of geopolitics as to equate the two speaks volumes.They are talking up starting a war with Iran. Not now. But as soon as they get the chance. You have heard the rhetoric from the Repubs during the campaign for POTUS?Feos wrote:
And mentioning the bicameral nature of our legislature was merely to ensure I didn't make the same mistake of blaming it all on one person. As well as showing that your "the Republicans" quip was utter nonsense. They control one half of one third of the government. Not even the part that sets foreign policy. They aren't going to start a war anywhere, with anyone.
My point is that another war is the last thing the US needs right now.
Does it hurt when the DNC puts their hand up your ass and moves your mouth?Dilbert_X wrote:
In eight years Bush created many of the problems, Obama has not fixed them in three, so what?
Some things are very hard to undo, they're going to take decades.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
That you can't understand that attacking a country is an act of war.....They are not "talking up starting a war with Iran." Saying that military options are not off the table and that it may come to military strikes to disable Iran's nuclear capability is NOT the same thing as "starting a war with Iran." The fact that you have such a narrow view of geopolitics as to equate the two speaks volumes.
Fuck Israel
Apparently military acts are considered diplomatic negotiations.
And there's a few of the candidates who have called for more than just bombing supposed WMD sites. Romney calls for forced regime change.
Again, totally peaceful of course...
Feos do you just ignore this or just pretend it isn't true?
And there's a few of the candidates who have called for more than just bombing supposed WMD sites. Romney calls for forced regime change.
Again, totally peaceful of course...
Feos do you just ignore this or just pretend it isn't true?
The only way we are going to fight Iran is if they kill Americans in some public dramatic way. There isn't any chance of us starting a war with them. Republicans are just trying to get the votes of the shiftys of their party (dumb America fuck yeah types). No need to freak out.
Gingrich is even less likable than Santorum.Kmar wrote:
Gingrich Wins The GOP Debate In The First Five Minutes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl … Yf_005EqDMNORTH CHARLESTON, South Carolina—Newt Gingrich scored an early victory in tonight's Republican Presidential Debate with an indignant response to moderator John King's question about his ex-wife.
"I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on a topic such as this," Gingrich said to huge applause.
He added that bringing up the issue so close to the primary "is as close to despicable as anything I could imagine."
Gingrich's ex-wife Marianne Gingrich told ABC News' Brian Ross that Gingrich asked her for an open marriage so he could carry on an affair with his current wife, Callista. Gingrich and his daughters have denied the charge.
When King tried to defend his network, noting that the interview with the former Mrs. Gingrich is airing on ABC later tonight, Gingrich attacked CNN for repeating the "false" claims in the interview.
"It was repeated by your network, you chose to start your debate with it. Don’t try to pass the blame on to someone else," he said to a standing ovation.
Gingrich is paying the victim card and media critic with aplomb. This is the only thing anyone will be talking about tonight, and he won the moment.
If he gets the nomination, they might as well just hand the presidency to Obama.
Granted, it's not like it would matter if Gingrich won either. They've all been bought, except for Paul (for the most part).
Looks like it's my turn to vote in the primaries now.
I wonder who you guys think I'm voting for..lol
I wonder who you guys think I'm voting for..lol
Xbone Stormsurgezz
That you can't understand that in today's geopolitical climate, limited attacks do not rise to the level of "war" shows how little you and AR grasp the reality of the situation. You're applying a late 19th, early 20th-century paradigm.Dilbert_X wrote:
That you can't understand that attacking a country is an act of war.....They are not "talking up starting a war with Iran." Saying that military options are not off the table and that it may come to military strikes to disable Iran's nuclear capability is NOT the same thing as "starting a war with Iran." The fact that you have such a narrow view of geopolitics as to equate the two speaks volumes.
A state of war didn't exist between NATO and Serbia, did it? No.
A state of war didn't exist between the coalition and Iraq during Desert Storm, did it? No.
A state of war didn't exist between the coalition and Iraq during the Desert Fox series of strikes, did it? No.
All of which were military endgames of diplomatic paths that had run their courses or were use of the military instrument of power to augment the diplomatic instrument of power to bring the other party to the negotiating table (Serbia).
The only examples of "war" we've had have been OIF and OEF. That won't be happening again for the foreseeable future.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Heard last night that in groups where 100% had heard of Gingrich, 60% disliked him. Those aren't good polling numbers for the general.Turquoise wrote:
Gingrich is even less likable than Santorum.Kmar wrote:
Gingrich Wins The GOP Debate In The First Five Minutes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl … Yf_005EqDMNORTH CHARLESTON, South Carolina—Newt Gingrich scored an early victory in tonight's Republican Presidential Debate with an indignant response to moderator John King's question about his ex-wife.
"I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on a topic such as this," Gingrich said to huge applause.
He added that bringing up the issue so close to the primary "is as close to despicable as anything I could imagine."
Gingrich's ex-wife Marianne Gingrich told ABC News' Brian Ross that Gingrich asked her for an open marriage so he could carry on an affair with his current wife, Callista. Gingrich and his daughters have denied the charge.
When King tried to defend his network, noting that the interview with the former Mrs. Gingrich is airing on ABC later tonight, Gingrich attacked CNN for repeating the "false" claims in the interview.
"It was repeated by your network, you chose to start your debate with it. Don’t try to pass the blame on to someone else," he said to a standing ovation.
Gingrich is paying the victim card and media critic with aplomb. This is the only thing anyone will be talking about tonight, and he won the moment.
If he gets the nomination, they might as well just hand the presidency to Obama.
Granted, it's not like it would matter if Gingrich won either. They've all been bought, except for Paul (for the most part).
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
I would vote for Obama before Gingrich.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Good plan.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
That bad, huh?Jay wrote:
I would vote for Obama before Gingrich.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
He's probably the most despicable person I've ever seen run for president. Richard Nixon looks like a saint next to him. He's a powermonger and he makes zero attempt to disguise that fact.Spark wrote:
That bad, huh?Jay wrote:
I would vote for Obama before Gingrich.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
A military attack on a nation is an act of war - it really is that simple.FEOS wrote:
That you can't understand that in today's geopolitical climate, limited attacks do not rise to the level of "war" shows how little you and AR grasp the reality of the situation. You're applying a late 19th, early 20th-century paradigm.Dilbert_X wrote:
That you can't understand that attacking a country is an act of war.....They are not "talking up starting a war with Iran." Saying that military options are not off the table and that it may come to military strikes to disable Iran's nuclear capability is NOT the same thing as "starting a war with Iran." The fact that you have such a narrow view of geopolitics as to equate the two speaks volumes.
A state of war didn't exist between NATO and Serbia, did it? No.
A state of war didn't exist between the coalition and Iraq during Desert Storm, did it? No.
A state of war didn't exist between the coalition and Iraq during the Desert Fox series of strikes, did it? No.
All of which were military endgames of diplomatic paths that had run their courses or were use of the military instrument of power to augment the diplomatic instrument of power to bring the other party to the negotiating table (Serbia).
The only examples of "war" we've had have been OIF and OEF. That won't be happening again for the foreseeable future.
Fuck Israel
All of those examples you posted are instances of extremely powerful countries attacking one much weaker country that pose no serious threat to the powerful ones.
If one of two equal powers did the same thing we do or threaten to do to smaller countries, it would be all out war. But since those small countries like Iran are not existential threats to us, and we are to them, we can call it bolstering our diplomatic position and get away with it.
Without condemning or condoning foreign policy experts universally recognize this.
If one of two equal powers did the same thing we do or threaten to do to smaller countries, it would be all out war. But since those small countries like Iran are not existential threats to us, and we are to them, we can call it bolstering our diplomatic position and get away with it.
Without condemning or condoning foreign policy experts universally recognize this.
Last edited by Macbeth (2012-01-24 05:54:37)
lol US health care. For comparison, the UK has a very similar health profile to the US.
Last edited by Hurricane2k9 (2012-01-24 07:32:14)
Same here, actually.Jay wrote:
I would vote for Obama before Gingrich.
Yeah, it's similar to how ineffective we are at public education below the college level.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
lol US health care. For comparison, the UK has a very similar health profile to the US.
Romney?Kmar wrote:
Looks like it's my turn to vote in the primaries now.
I wonder who you guys think I'm voting for..lol
Kmar is voting Paul. Tragic.
Besides Huntsman, Paul is the only one worth voting for.Macbeth wrote:
Kmar is voting Paul. Tragic.