the WAR ON TERROR... got Old

[ricksitterly]

in spite of all the intense arguing about this topic, i cant say that any of these events surprise me. perhaps for a short time, Americans thought we were so civilized that we were safe from the basic threats in human nature. that's what government/civilization is designed to do... to confine and to mask the basic impulses of human nature - after sex, violence is the most natural instinct of being human.

in other countries, especially the type we are up against, buildings blowing up and mass killings are nothing new. we've been watching mtv and going to the mall so much that we thought bombs and disasters were something that existed only on our television, as a form of entertainment.

honestly, i must say that, for a short while, i believed civilization had evolved to a point where war was becoming an idea of the past, a senseless brutality read about mostly in history books. but alas, human nature shows through it all on ( 9/11). And how worthy a conflict to remind us that very fact than an attack driven by men who believe they are fighting an ancient holy war against "evil" (in this case the evil ones somehow being the US). but, as i said, nothing new here... hate/ religion/ greed/ war/ - the same things you read about happening in biblical times. the technology may change, but human nature always remains the same. If we are not safe from it now, its probly' safe to say that there will ALWAYS be war and hunger for power.

Also, i believe if Iraq were not the target, bush would surely have chosen another in its place... the sudden focus on iraq seems random enough that it may as well have been any other "potentially dangerous" nation that we attack as a result of the 9/11 attacks. it seems he's acting out of frustration really. seeing how the 9/11 attacks were committed by an enemy that you cannot truly declare war on. think about it, bush declares "WAR ON TERROR", which lasted about five minutes and we got bored of it....he needed a solid target, a country, to focus on. We know right where iraq is, it's on the map. Now we dont have to worry about "sleeper cells" and independant terrorists willing to die for bin laden's cause living right here in this country. Bush simply couldn't profit from a war on terror... it was too expensive and a real pain in the @ss. He got tired of looking for the bad apples among all those coming in through customs, and decided "Iraq is the real terrorist. If we disarm Iraq, the world will once again be safe from terror" After all, clearly people like bin laden get all of their influence and motivation from Iraq. Now after Iraq we have North Korea to look forward to. It seems that another terrorist attack in America would hit us hardest, and be easiest to organize, while we are so focused on the war overseas. Sorry for the rant u guys, but it just seems that the focus on Iraq lets our guard down to another attack from within, which is what got us so riled up in the first place.

[ewallace]

I was hoping we'd have another thread on this topic. Thanks.

[ricksitterly]

there's just too few threads about it... SOMEONE HAD TO JUST COME OUT AND SAY IT ;)

[red5angel]

yawn, "Also, i believe if Iraq were not the target, bush would surely have chosen another in its place... the sudden focus on iraq seems random enough "

I see you and LC are in on this whole thing together.:rolleyes: random, this guy cracks me up.

[dnc101]

ew, and r5a,

As I explained elsewhere, it is the same old liberal tactic. When the other threads get too hot for them, and their twistrd logic is exposed for a sham, they simply bail out and start another thread. It's the old circular argument ploy. Keep repeating the same old idiocy and hope we get tired of responding to it.

Inthis case, I have to say, "Rant on, ricky. Your post here needs no reply to illustrate the stupidity of fanatical liberalism."

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by dnc101
Inthis case, I have to say, "Rant on, ricky. Your post here needs no reply to illustrate the stupidity of fanatical liberalism."

DOH! :o :D

[ricksitterly]

uh oh... in that case i'd better start a new thread. maybe somewhere less obvious where u guys wont catch it. hmmm.... maybe in the wing chun forum

for the record it didnt get "too hot" for me in another thread.. this was my first post involving the iraq issue

[Black Jack]

Sorry I was out french kissing a tree while drapped in a feces stained american flag with a bunch of hippy chicks with ample armpit hair.....did I miss something.

Urrrrp.....sorry I just burped up some starbucks.

[KC Elbows]

"As I explained elsewhere, it is the same old liberal tactic. When the other threads get too hot for them, and their twistrd logic is exposed for a sham, they simply bail out and start another thread. It's the old circular argument ploy. Keep repeating the same old idiocy and hope we get tired of responding to it.

As a liberal, I have to point out that I've been on those other threads you're talking about, and sometimes certain conservatives were making good points, but the above quote is NOT one of them. God, you know, normally I didn't think you were this obtuse. Oh, I'm sorry, in language you'd understand, "Same old conservative smear campaign".:rolleyes:

Every time I see one of these little jabs, like 'anti-american liberal crap" and things like that, I think, all that typing, and no real point. There are valid criticisms to be made, too bad they fail to do so. I think the same thing when I see a post from a left leaning member that gets into the bilderberg and such, but I guess I can't expect others to see th fault in their supporters.

[ewallace]

What are you trying to say KC? :)

[KC Elbows]

My point is clear.

[red5angel]

by the way, in case anyone missed it, going to war with Iraq is part o fthe war on terror......

[ewallace]

What point, KC?

[ricksitterly]

personally i just feel justified in having an opinion about the war, seeing as how i am going to be fighting in it (if it happens) , being a U.S. soldier and all. no need to give me a label as being a "liberal" or whatever, i'm really not into politics. I'm just someone whose life is directly and immediately affected by the conflict... not someone who sits around choosing sides in a political argument. i am entitled to my opinion on the war. regardless of my opinion, it is my duty to follow those orders given by the President and my superiors. i am not against the war, but was simply stating that it takes focus off of the danger of terrorists operating within the US. those of you who feel so strongly about this should show that conviction and join the fight. while we're out there fighting it, you'll still be here talking about it.

[eulerfan]

Originally posted by dnc101
ew, and r5a,

As I explained elsewhere, it is the same old liberal tactic. When the other threads get too hot for them, and their twistrd logic is exposed for a sham, they simply bail out and start another thread. It's the old circular argument ploy. Keep repeating the same old idiocy and hope we get tired of responding to it.


Well, I for one think that tactic is pretty dumb and illogical. It's right up there with a hasty generalization. I think liberals use that one a lot, as well. Two or three conservatives will do something and suddenly they are talking as though it's a technique taught in the conservative's instruction manual.

Stupid liberals.

[ricksitterly]

like i stated above euler, i'm not about the political arguments. just stating my opinion

[KC Elbows]

Rick,
Good luck to you.

eWallace,
That there is no 'typical liberal tactic' any more than there is a 'typical conservative tactic'. If people begin to act typically, it's just their own uninspired thinking. Of course, I don't genuinely think you were getting at an answer. Pardon me for caring what my country does.

[eulerfan]

Originally posted by ricksitterly
like i stated above euler, i'm not about the political arguments. just stating my opinion

ricksitterly, I was being ironical.

I'm a bleeding heart liberal.

[ewallace]

Pardon me for caring what my country does.
That's it. Get your ass to the tanning salon now. That lack of sunlight thing is getting to you.

Don't ever take that tone with me again KC, you silly, silly liberal.

[dnc101]

I think I hit a nerve here! My day is now complete.

How many times do you guys want to recycle the same old threads? And wht is your point? I think, judging by the vitriol in your responses, that my assesment was pretty close to the mark.

[KC Elbows]

Which tone, eWallace?

[KC Elbows]

dnc, if you are correct, then point out where I walked away from the discussion in another thread, which was your point.

The point was, I did not. And I feel I've made valid points. My viewpoint is not all that different than Merry's, but because of my politics, I must be subjected to being said to have 'twisted logic' and 'typical liberal tactics'. Utterly childish.

EDIT: in all fairness, I recognize that sometimes you might be subjected to the same from my camp. I do not support them for the same reason I do not support what you are saying.

[ewallace]

Don't change the subject KC. Typical liberal tactic.

[KC Elbows]

“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger."
- Hermann Goering at the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal following World War Two

[eulerfan]

Originally posted by dnc101
I think I hit a nerve here! My day is now complete.

How many times do you guys want to recycle the same old threads? And wht is your point? I think, judging by the vitriol in your responses, that my assesment was pretty close to the mark.

And what they respond to? What about that? No vitriol in that post?

'twistrd logic is exposed for a sham'
'repeating the same old idiocy'

I think you can point that finger up your @ss.

[KC Elbows]

I think you can point that finger up your @ss.

Won't he poke himself in the eye?

[ricksitterly]

"ricksitterly, I was being ironical.

I'm a bleeding heart liberal." ~eulerfan

o i definetly noticed that euler, im not accusing u of anything. just making sure u read what i wrote above ur reply :) i dont even know what a liberal IS!!

cant some of u guys maybe discuss the war in a more down to earth fashion - meaning how it relates to your every day life - without suddenly transforming from a (alleged) martial artist to someone who acts as if they've spent their whole life actively involved in politics? honestly its too much political jargan for my simple mind to grasp :)

maybe u guys can fit some time into ur busy schedule as a computer nerd/ politician/ critic to do some training :))) by the way... does anyone WORK around here?

[ewallace]

maybe u guys can fit some time into ur busy schedule as a computer nerd/ politician/ critic to do some training )) by the way... does anyone WORK around here?
Yes, I do work. And it's also called Windows, with heavy emphasis on the "s". :)

[red5angel]

"maybe u guys can fit some time into ur busy schedule as a computer nerd/ politician/ critic to do some training )) by the way... does anyone WORK around here?"

anyone else here spot the irony?

[dnc101]

Just a quick check. Still touchy, I see.

Where, you ask. Here. You came to restart the same old arguments that were answered elsewhere.

[KC Elbows]

Yeah, windows does wonders for my work day.

Back to your topic. I suppose all the attention on the war might detract from security back at home, but, at the same time, how secure can we make home? I mean, no one's gonna sit down for a hijacker after 9/11, so they almost need explosives or something similar, which makes it much more difficult for them. The planes in 9/11 were the effective touch, because they could, excuse the terminology, deliver their payload across great distance. That's not likely to happen again.

So, you've got explosives, and of course, WOMD. Now, delivery is the problem there, but not insurmountable. And by the time they are at airplane security, it's too late. I don't know the solution.

BTW, though I obviously have certain opinions of the present situation, I still wish you success in the military, and especially if you go to war. My disagreements are political, not military. The military is a tool, disagreeing with a tool is silly. Should you see action, I hope sudden victory for you in all your skirmishes, and may you be surrounded by competent men. May you always face an enemy weakened. And may you be a godsend to the innocents where you serve.


dnc,
I'm not sure why you think I'm still touchy, but I'm not. The last post was just laughing at Eulerfan's excellent critique of your post.

[eulerfan]

Originally posted by dnc101
Just a quick check. Still touchy, I see.

Where, you ask. Here. You came to restart the same old arguments that were answered elsewhere.

I am not going to respond to this post.

It doesn't deserve a response.

I'm not actually posting. This post is not actually here. Please move on. Your eyes decieve you.

[KC Elbows]

:D

[ewallace]

That smiley face is a typical liberal tactic KC.

[KC Elbows]

Don't forget my handle. It's all commie pinko code. If you know the code, 'KC Elbows' actually means 'Stalin ****s you in pumps'. But you already knew that.:D <-----typical liberal tactic

[@PLUGO]

oh Yeah!!!!

TASTES GREAT!!!

[Royal Dragon]

Less Filling!!!!!

[KC Elbows]

RD and his typical conservative font.

[eulerfan]

Yeah. And did you notice that he used 5 exclamation points instead of the far more logical 3.

:rolleyes:

[KC Elbows]

Typical.

[@PLUGO]

Well... you fjord know what thefjord Illuminati fjord believe about fjord the number 5 fjord !!!

[eulerfan]

There should be seperate water fountains for conservatives.



They're not like us.

[KC Elbows]

I made an old conservative get to the back of the bus earlier. I wasn't even riding on it at the time, I just got on to make him do it. Cuz he looked uppity.

They're all lazy, y'know.

[eulerfan]

You did right. Give 'em an inch, they'll take a mile.

Have you noticed the slope on the conservative's forehead tends to be a bit more shallow? It's called the Gingrich differential. There have been a lot of studies about how that indicates laziness. I'll have to show you my diagrams.

[@PLUGO]

Hey, How many conservatives does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

[KC Elbows]

Originally posted by Design Sifu
Hey, How many conservatives does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

How many?

[still laughing at the Gingrich Differential, the GD:D ]

[dnc101]

Well, guys, I've been off sick a few days. Now I have to get back to the grind. But it's been entertaining. I bet someof you have really good rythm, too.

I'll just leave you with a few thoughts:

eulerfan- Lick my finger. (It's chocolate, really!)

Design Sifu- The thing to note is that we can get the light bulb changed. An important distinction in the context of this discussion.

KC Elbows- my eye is doing much better now. Thanks for your concern.

To all- peace, love and flowers atcha!

Bye for now...

[eulerfan]

Originally posted by dnc101
eulerfan- Lick my finger. (It's chocolate, really!)


*looks right, then left*

It doesn't smell like chocolate.

[guohuen]

Six. One to change the lightbulb and five to argue about how good the old one was.