Subject:
|
Re: The War That Never Ends
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 2 Aug 2003 12:24:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
397 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
Further, and as I have mentioned elsewhere, the overthrow of SH is a warning
to other tinpot dictators who might be considering harboring terrorists. We
have shown that we aren’t afraid to take action against such scum. Again,
this denies the pukes places to organize, train, etc.
|
There is zero proof Iraq was harboring anyone plotting moves against the U.S.
AQ, in particular, is supra-national. Cells may exist in as many as 60
countries including the U.S. Are we going to go after them all, John?
| |
Now you tell me what specific civil liberties you have had to sacrifice
as a result of the Bush administration.
|
Freedom from being summarily investigated and databased. People are being denied
the right to travel by air on the flimsiest pretexts. There is potential to be
expatriated and denied basically all of my rights, which has happened to some
americans already.
Anyway, you are trying to use specific anecdotal evidence as somehow having a
bearing on my point overall. Just because they have nothing on me doesn’t mean
that the rights of others are not being denied. We know the rights of others
are being denied. Everyone else on this board seems to agree on that point --
which is like saying that they are aware of this facet of current political
reality. Are you disagreeing?
| |
It is no wonder that liberties get curtailed in times of war
(always have), and when peace is restored, so are the liberties.
|
That shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what is under consideration -- this
war against terrorism is not expected to end probably in my lifetime. May I take
the “war on drugs” as a sign of the inability to stop a problem emanating from a
variety of sources? You part ways with reality to justify your political
leanings, John.
| |
No, because SH failed to provide evidence to the inspectors that he had
destroyed his WMD.
|
I didn’t say he there may not have been reasons, John. I am citing from things
Shrub is known to have said, statements he knew to be false when he made them.
False statements that the press made but small murmerings about, thereby
allowing the statements to operate as unchallenged propaganda to those americans
making time only for soundbites.
By trying to sidestep the pointedly false statements made by Shrub, you are
doing the exact same thing.
| |
That wasn’t my question. Again: Do you think FDR abhorred the US
Constitution?
|
I haven’t spent a lot of time recently studying the activities of a President
many years before my time, but if you want a yes or no answer I think my answer
must be yes. If memory serves, there is at a minimum the famous court packing
thing to consider amongst many other things. I am thinking that FICA was also
passed under his watch, and I oppose it as well. I suppose the many socialist
style programs passed during FDR’s stint are pretty abominable also.
But then again, you may recall my oft expressed annoyance at paying taxes like a
socialist but not getting the benefits enjoyed by more socialist countries. The
government enjoys a free ride with our money because of the tension provided by
us suckers that oppose socialist schemes -- they get our money via taxes and
then we oppose its use because we politically object to the manner in which it
will be spent. Well, sorry -- I’d prefer to get value for the dollars spent in
taxes. Sign me up for all of it.
BTW, some of this stuff is not strictly unconstitutional, mainly just the way
the taxing powers have been abused. The rest could probably be legislated
legitimately at a local or state level if not a federal level.
| |
In the immortal words of Ronald Reagan: “There you go again!” See? All you
can do is rip everyone in your ivory tower. It’s old.
|
A problem being old has nothing to do with anything. If caring about the power
of the people to effectively participate in government is to be considered old,
then I must declare that “everything old is new again!”
| |
The scary part is that you probably really do have faith in the complete
farce otherwise known as the U.N. If those emasculated nincompoops had
done their jobs in the first place, we wouldn’t have had to do it for them.
|
To the contrary, I don’t care whether they could have done the job or not --
Iraq was not a U.S. specific problem so I was happy to let it drag on forever.
Plus, the use of the U.N. forces and money would have kept the whole shebang off
the U.S. taxpayers backs. I think even Shrub is now regretting those harsh
words against the U.N. -- will he now get the backing of those he claimed were
irrelevant to his cause? Shrub’s extreme ignorance on foreign affairs is going
to cost us and our children a lot of $$$.
Just as a side note, the very guys in D.C. today clamoring for Saddam’s blood
are the very guys that profited from Saddam’s cruelty for years. You connect the
dots. Yeah, they’re going to capture Saddam alive and allow him to stand trial
-- not bloody likely.
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: The War That Never Ends
|
| (...) (URL) AQ, in particular, is supra-national. Cells may exist in as many as 60 (...) Certainly some. And convince and assist the other countries to purge them by themselves. (...) Really? When were you summarily investigated and databased? (...) (...) (21 years ago, 2-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: The War That Never Ends
|
| (...) Well, there you have it. There's nothing like an open mind, and yours is nothing like it! But to answer anyway: In both Iraq and Afganistan, terrorists were allowed safe haven to train and plot their attacks. By eliminating the governments who (...) (21 years ago, 2-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
30 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
