Religions > Atheism > Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President?
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Rump Ranger" |
| Date: |
20 Jan 2005 01:32:18 AM |
| Object: |
Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
moorehead wrote:
Rump Ranger wrote:
Let's see if I can figure this out. Deserters are "cowards" simply
because they don't believe in the lies of the government but yet
the
same people who would gladly lynch one of them believes George Bush
is
a great President. Yet he was a deserter.
It's amazing. The level of cognitive dissonance among these people
is
beyond belief.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6693-2004Sep8_2.html
Records Say Bush Balked at Order
National Guard Commander Suspended Him From Flying, Papers Show
Um, this is a joke, right? You're pulling our legs? You're
attempting
some sort of internet/usenet version of punk'd?
The real joke is Bush supporters in the military voting for a deserter
to take office.
.
|
|
| User: "LawsonE" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
29 Jan 2005 06:51:54 PM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:dv2ov0djhcaifqs2kkfsnsoh13v90fl5in@4ax.com...
On 29 Jan 2005 12:05:18 -0800, "Rump Ranger" <buttpirate@fadmail.com>
said in alt.atheism:
But it's different when we become the new dictators. What I found
funny about that spectacle of worship know as the Presidential
Innaugeration was that Bush said he's not imposing American values by
force on other peoples.
He probably actually believes that, more's the horror.
His speech was quite Orwellian in it's unintentional irony.
I keep saying that Orwell wasn't wrong, he was just a bit premature.
Bush's speech writers and advisors may well know the Orwellian irony and
may be poking fun at the very people that Bush was directing his speech to
because they're so illiterate. Recall the name "Office of Homeland
Security."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
29 Jan 2005 11:53:35 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 22:20:17 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On 29 Jan 2005 12:05:18 -0800, "Rump Ranger" <buttpirate@fadmail.com>
said in alt.atheism:
But it's different when we become the new dictators. What I found
funny about that spectacle of worship know as the Presidential
Innaugeration was that Bush said he's not imposing American values by
force on other peoples.
He probably actually believes that, more's the horror.
Then name an 'American Value' being 'imposed by force.'
Unless you think that Saddam is your role model?
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
01 Feb 2005 08:28:21 AM |
|
|
Colin Campbell (remove underscore) wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 22:20:17 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On 29 Jan 2005 12:05:18 -0800, "Rump Ranger"
<buttpirate@fadmail.com>
said in alt.atheism:
But it's different when we become the new dictators. What I found
funny about that spectacle of worship know as the Presidential
Innaugeration was that Bush said he's not imposing American values
by
force on other peoples.
He probably actually believes that, more's the horror.
Then name an 'American Value' being 'imposed by force.'
Abu Ghraib. It's the New American Values.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
30 Jan 2005 06:06:01 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 08:53:35 +0300, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> said in alt.atheism:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 22:20:17 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On 29 Jan 2005 12:05:18 -0800, "Rump Ranger" <buttpirate@fadmail.com>
said in alt.atheism:
But it's different when we become the new dictators. What I found
funny about that spectacle of worship know as the Presidential
Innaugeration was that Bush said he's not imposing American values by
force on other peoples.
He probably actually believes that, more's the horror.
Then name an 'American Value' being 'imposed by force.'
Democracy is being imposed. We're being shot at.
--
"I see only with deep regret that God punishes so many of His children for their
numerous stupidities, for which only He Himself can be held responsible; in my opinion,
only His nonexistence could excuse Him."
-A. Einstein (Letter to Edgar Meyer, Jan. 2, 1915)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "AUK Registrar" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
31 Jan 2005 05:44:19 PM |
|
|
In <citqv05guk5mf1c8isii1gpiirqlm9ovff@4ax.com>, Al Klein
<rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 08:53:35 +0300, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> said in alt.atheism:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 22:20:17 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On 29 Jan 2005 12:05:18 -0800, "Rump Ranger" <buttpirate@fadmail.com>
said in alt.atheism:
But it's different when we become the new dictators. What I found
funny about that spectacle of worship know as the Presidential
Innaugeration was that Bush said he's not imposing American values by
force on other peoples.
He probably actually believes that, more's the horror.
Then name an 'American Value' being 'imposed by force.'
Democracy is being imposed. We're being shot at.
Funny thing is, they had "elections" before. But now there's more than one
candidate to choose from.
.
|
|
|
| User: "THOM" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
01 Feb 2005 03:02:22 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:44:19 -0500, AUK Registrar <cjiii@mxyzptlk.net>
wrote:
In <citqv05guk5mf1c8isii1gpiirqlm9ovff@4ax.com>, Al Klein
<rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 08:53:35 +0300, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> said in alt.atheism:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 22:20:17 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On 29 Jan 2005 12:05:18 -0800, "Rump Ranger" <buttpirate@fadmail.com>
said in alt.atheism:
But it's different when we become the new dictators. What I found
funny about that spectacle of worship know as the Presidential
Innaugeration was that Bush said he's not imposing American values by
force on other peoples.
He probably actually believes that, more's the horror.
Then name an 'American Value' being 'imposed by force.'
Democracy is being imposed. We're being shot at.
Funny thing is, they had "elections" before. But now there's more than one
candidate to choose from.
At least they don't have the tyrany of the 2 party system like we do.
THOM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
01 Feb 2005 02:07:41 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 21:02:22 GMT, (THOM) said in
alt.atheism:
At least they don't have the tyrany of the 2 party system like we do.
Nope, they just have a one party system. Makes things a lot easier.
Shrub must be drooling.
--
"I can't activate two neurons simultaneously, and I vote"
- The theistic majority
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "THOM" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
02 Feb 2005 04:25:47 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 20:07:41 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 21:02:22 GMT, (THOM) said in
alt.atheism:
At least they don't have the tyrany of the 2 party system like we do.
Nope, they just have a one party system. Makes things a lot easier.
Shrub must be drooling.
I saw a TV program last night on Murdick and his media empire/FOX.
Dozens of x-employees told all kinds of stories and they showed out
takes of TV shows where anyone who wasn't right wing was attacked and
belittled. FOX is basically the propaghanda machine for the RNC now.
The media is controlled by big money and people like Murdock and we
may have a one party system soon anyway.
THOM
--
"I can't activate two neurons simultaneously, and I vote"
- The theistic majority
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
01 Feb 2005 05:41:13 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 21:02:22 GMT, (THOM) wrote:
At least they don't have the tyrany of the 2 party system like we do.
Is it not a shame that we have the form of government that the
majority of the people want and not the form that you personally want?
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "THOM" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
02 Feb 2005 04:22:43 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 14:41:13 +0300, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 21:02:22 GMT, (THOM) wrote:
At least they don't have the tyrany of the 2 party system like we do.
Is it not a shame that we have the form of government that the
majority of the people want and not the form that you personally want?
Do they? Then why are the third parties save the communists (which
has been reduced to a place to meet girls) growing? People are
getting fed up with the corruption of the republicans and incompetance
of the Democrats and looking elsewhere. A third of the voters are so
fed up they don't even bother to vote.
THOM
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
01 Feb 2005 10:30:05 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:22:43 GMT, (THOM) wrote:
Is it not a shame that we have the form of government that the
majority of the people want and not the form that you personally want?
Do they? Then why are the third parties save the communists (which
has been reduced to a place to meet girls) growing? People are
getting fed up with the corruption of the republicans and incompetance
of the Democrats and looking elsewhere. A third of the voters are so
fed up they don't even bother to vote.
In your opinion.
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "LawsonE" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
02 Feb 2005 07:12:02 PM |
|
|
"Colin Campbell" <activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote in
message news:fol0019ji0slpu0hljf6uq60f4nga6onp1@4ax.com...
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:22:43 GMT, (THOM) wrote:
Is it not a shame that we have the form of government that the
majority of the people want and not the form that you personally want?
Do they? Then why are the third parties save the communists (which
has been reduced to a place to meet girls) growing? People are
getting fed up with the corruption of the republicans and incompetance
of the Democrats and looking elsewhere. A third of the voters are so
fed up they don't even bother to vote.
In your opinion.
So why don't they vote in YOUR opinion?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rump Ranger" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
03 Feb 2005 05:46:26 AM |
|
|
Colin Campbell (remove underscore) wrote:
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:22:43 GMT, (THOM) wrote:
Is it not a shame that we have the form of government that the
majority of the people want and not the form that you personally
want?
Do they? Then why are the third parties save the communists (which
has been reduced to a place to meet girls) growing? People are
getting fed up with the corruption of the republicans and
incompetance
of the Democrats and looking elsewhere. A third of the voters are
so
fed up they don't even bother to vote.
In your opinion.
Not really. A good portion of people aren't voting. But since you're
so out of touch with reality, it doesn't really matter.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
31 Jan 2005 02:00:21 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 00:06:01 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
But it's different when we become the new dictators. What I found
funny about that spectacle of worship know as the Presidential
Innaugeration was that Bush said he's not imposing American values by
force on other peoples.
He probably actually believes that, more's the horror.
Then name an 'American Value' being 'imposed by force.'
Democracy is being imposed. We're being shot at.
Democracy is being imposed by the Iraqi people. We are helping them
achieve this dream.
Do you think we forced all those people to vote or something?
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "THOM" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
01 Feb 2005 05:31:51 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 11:00:21 +0300, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 00:06:01 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid>
wrote:
But it's different when we become the new dictators. What I found
funny about that spectacle of worship know as the Presidential
Innaugeration was that Bush said he's not imposing American values by
force on other peoples.
He probably actually believes that, more's the horror.
Then name an 'American Value' being 'imposed by force.'
Democracy is being imposed. We're being shot at.
Democracy is being imposed by the Iraqi people. We are helping them
achieve this dream.
what dream is that? No one asked them before hand? The whole region
is run by clans and seps, liberal democracies are totally foreign to
them plus with the loss of some freedoms in Iraq (ranging from nude
beaches to woman wearing anything they want) in favor of religious
stupidity I can't see how this is going to work. The Suni-Shai
rivalry will tear the placa apart and then throw in the Kurds for
flavor.
Do you think we forced all those people to vote or something?
The vote is surprising and was definately against the right wing
religious nuts. That much is quite encouraging indeed.
THOM
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
31 Jan 2005 11:11:58 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 11:31:51 GMT, (THOM) wrote:
Democracy is being imposed by the Iraqi people. We are helping them
achieve this dream.
what dream is that? No one asked them before hand? The whole region
is run by clans and seps, liberal democracies are totally foreign to
them plus with the loss of some freedoms in Iraq (ranging from nude
beaches to woman wearing anything they want) in favor of religious
stupidity I can't see how this is going to work. The Suni-Shai
rivalry will tear the placa apart and then throw in the Kurds for
flavor.
You seem to be assuming that 'religious stupidity' is going to rule
Iraq. This is amusing that some of the people we are fighting want a
Taliban style rule of the country.
IMO if the Iraqis want things like nude beaches they can have them -
if they do not it is fine with me also. You see, under a
representative form of government - the choice is theirs.
Do you think we forced all those people to vote or something?
The vote is surprising and was definately against the right wing
religious nuts. That much is quite encouraging indeed.
Maybe surprising for you. I predicted these results several weeks
ago.
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "THOM" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
01 Feb 2005 03:01:28 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 08:11:58 +0300, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 11:31:51 GMT, (THOM) wrote:
Democracy is being imposed by the Iraqi people. We are helping them
achieve this dream.
what dream is that? No one asked them before hand? The whole region
is run by clans and seps, liberal democracies are totally foreign to
them plus with the loss of some freedoms in Iraq (ranging from nude
beaches to woman wearing anything they want) in favor of religious
stupidity I can't see how this is going to work. The Suni-Shai
rivalry will tear the placa apart and then throw in the Kurds for
flavor.
You seem to be assuming that 'religious stupidity' is going to rule
Iraq. This is amusing that some of the people we are fighting want a
Taliban style rule of the country.
it will fuel the fighting. the Sunnis want their stype of Islam to
run things, do not accept a civil government over Shari Law etc etc.
Thats the problem and thats a problem aside from the issue of assuring
the Kurds and Sunnis get a fair representation (both are about 20% of
the population.) I personally want to see Kurdistan reestablished.
IMO if the Iraqis want things like nude beaches they can have them -
Tell it to Bush and the Mulas
if they do not it is fine with me also. You see, under a
representative form of government - the choice is theirs.
Do you think we forced all those people to vote or something?
The vote is surprising and was definately against the right wing
religious nuts. That much is quite encouraging indeed.
Maybe surprising for you. I predicted these results several weeks
ago.
The Iraqis standing up to the religious right wing should be an
example to us to do the same. We should raise up against the
fundamentalists in America and demand freedom from their BS. They
seem to own the president right now but of course they don't bother to
tel;l him that Jesus said no rich person will ever go to heaven.
THOM
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
01 Feb 2005 05:39:25 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 21:01:28 GMT, (THOM) wrote:
You seem to be assuming that 'religious stupidity' is going to rule
Iraq. This is amusing that some of the people we are fighting want a
Taliban style rule of the country.
it will fuel the fighting. the Sunnis want their stype of Islam to
run things, do not accept a civil government over Shari Law etc etc.
Which Sunnis? Most of the Sunnis only want to be left alone.
There is one subset of Sunnis who want to return themselves to
positions of power and privilege and the muj who want shari law.
Neither of these groups can claim to represent the Sunni people of
Iraq.
Thats the problem and thats a problem aside from the issue of assuring
the Kurds and Sunnis get a fair representation (both are about 20% of
the population.) I personally want to see Kurdistan reestablished.
When was the last time 'Kurdistan' existed as an independent political
entity?
IMO if the Iraqis want things like nude beaches they can have them -
Tell it to Bush and the Mulas
Since I do not vote in Iraqi elections - this will be decided by the
Iraqi people.
The Iraqis standing up to the religious right wing should be an
example to us to do the same. We should raise up against the
fundamentalists in America and demand freedom from their BS. They
seem to own the president right now but of course they don't bother to
tel;l him that Jesus said no rich person will ever go to heaven.
Nobody is 'standing up' to any religious 'right wing.' The goal is an
inclusive government where all have their say.
BTW, I am not impressed by prejudice in any form.
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
29 Jan 2005 04:11:46 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 01:14:57 -0800, Doogie Howitzer
<fl@ulence_abounds.com> wrote:
We *A*R*E* the terrorists in Iraq, dumbass. It's *T*H*E*I*R* country,
not ours.
So what do you call the people who car-bombed the mosque recently?
in·sur·gent ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-sûrjnt)
adj.
1. Rising in revolt against established authority, especially a government.
2. Rebelling against the leadership of a political party.
So you consider car-bombing a Mosque a legitimate act of war?
You need to get your value system adjusted.
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "LawsonE" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
29 Jan 2005 06:49:56 PM |
|
|
"Colin Campbell" <activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote in
message news:e8omv0tfh2h6g6soslmcc1blnlcfv7sa09@4ax.com...
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 01:14:57 -0800, Doogie Howitzer
<fl@ulence_abounds.com> wrote:
We *A*R*E* the terrorists in Iraq, dumbass. It's *T*H*E*I*R* country,
not ours.
So what do you call the people who car-bombed the mosque recently?
in·sur·gent ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-sûrjnt)
adj.
1. Rising in revolt against established authority, especially a
government.
2. Rebelling against the leadership of a political party.
So you consider car-bombing a Mosque a legitimate act of war?
You need to get your value system adjusted.
Tell it to the Irgun. Its been a tradition of insurgents since the term
"terrorist" was first coined by the British to describe pro-Zionist
guerillas.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rump Ranger" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
29 Jan 2005 01:45:55 PM |
|
|
Colin Campbell (remove underscore) wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 01:14:57 -0800, Doogie Howitzer
<fl@ulence_abounds.com> wrote:
We *A*R*E* the terrorists in Iraq, dumbass. It's *T*H*E*I*R*
country,
not ours.
So what do you call the people who car-bombed the mosque recently?
in=B7sur=B7gent ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-s=FBrjnt)
adj.
1. Rising in revolt against established authority, especially a
government.
2. Rebelling against the leadership of a political party.
So you consider car-bombing a Mosque a legitimate act of war?
And when it's a jet bombing from the sky or a howitzer firing shells it
is?
You need to get your value system adjusted.
No, you do, actually. There is no *value* in war. It's entirely the
opposite of anything which does have a value system.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
01 Feb 2005 08:19:21 AM |
|
|
Rump Ranger wrote:
So you consider car-bombing a Mosque a legitimate act of war?
And when it's a jet bombing from the sky or a howitzer firing shells
it
is?
Right. The more money the weapon costs, the more legitimate it is.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rump Ranger" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
03 Feb 2005 05:44:30 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Rump Ranger wrote:
So you consider car-bombing a Mosque a legitimate act of war?
And when it's a jet bombing from the sky or a howitzer firing
shells
it
is?
Right. The more money the weapon costs, the more legitimate it is.
True, true.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "THOM" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
30 Jan 2005 04:12:59 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 13:11:46 +0300, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 01:14:57 -0800, Doogie Howitzer
<fl@ulence_abounds.com> wrote:
We *A*R*E* the terrorists in Iraq, dumbass. It's *T*H*E*I*R* country,
not ours.
So what do you call the people who car-bombed the mosque recently?
in·sur·gent ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-sûrjnt)
adj.
1. Rising in revolt against established authority, especially a government.
2. Rebelling against the leadership of a political party.
So you consider car-bombing a Mosque a legitimate act of war?
its is traditional. Look how many churches we bombed in WW2
THOM
You need to get your value system adjusted.
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "AUK Registrar" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
30 Jan 2005 04:21:27 PM |
|
|
In <41fd59b0.544938@news.melbpc.org.au>, (THOM) wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 13:11:46 +0300, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 01:14:57 -0800, Doogie Howitzer
<fl@ulence_abounds.com> wrote:
We *A*R*E* the terrorists in Iraq, dumbass. It's *T*H*E*I*R* country,
not ours.
So what do you call the people who car-bombed the mosque recently?
in·sur·gent ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-sûrjnt)
adj.
1. Rising in revolt against established authority, especially a government.
2. Rebelling against the leadership of a political party.
So you consider car-bombing a Mosque a legitimate act of war?
its is traditional. Look how many churches we bombed in WW2
Right. It's a real shame all those smart bombs went off course in WWII. Then
there's all those V-1 and V-2 rockets the Germans fired at England ...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rump Ranger" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
31 Jan 2005 10:05:39 AM |
|
|
AUK Registrar wrote:
In <41fd59b0.544938@news.melbpc.org.au>, (THOM)
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 13:11:46 +0300, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 01:14:57 -0800, Doogie Howitzer
<fl@ulence_abounds.com> wrote:
We *A*R*E* the terrorists in Iraq, dumbass. It's *T*H*E*I*R*
country,
not ours.
So what do you call the people who car-bombed the mosque
recently?
in=B7sur=B7gent ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-s=FBrjnt)
adj.
1. Rising in revolt against established authority, especially a
government.
2. Rebelling against the leadership of a political party.
So you consider car-bombing a Mosque a legitimate act of war?
its is traditional. Look how many churches we bombed in WW2
Right. It's a real shame all those smart bombs went off course in
WWII. Then
there's all those V-1 and V-2 rockets the Germans fired at England
..=2E.
If you're arguing that all Germans in Dresden were responsible for
British civilians dying and therefore desrved to fry, then you have no
complaint when a terrorist group kills American civilians during an
attack like 9/11 after American policy kills civilians of an Arab
country.
The reason why the attack on 9/11 was illegitimate is because most
people believe killing of civilians is wrong. Wrong when my country
does it and wrong when they do it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "AUK Registrar" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
31 Jan 2005 05:42:41 PM |
|
|
In <1107187539.008003.53550@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, "Rump Ranger"
<buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote:
AUK Registrar wrote:
In <41fd59b0.544938@news.melbpc.org.au>, (THOM)
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 13:11:46 +0300, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
So you consider car-bombing a Mosque a legitimate act of war?
its is traditional. Look how many churches we bombed in WW2
Right. It's a real shame all those smart bombs went off course in
WWII. Then
there's all those V-1 and V-2 rockets the Germans fired at England
...
If you're arguing that all Germans in Dresden were responsible for
British civilians dying and therefore desrved to fry,
Except that I'm not. That's not what this little part of the thread is
about.
Nice try though.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rump Ranger" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
03 Feb 2005 05:38:11 AM |
|
|
AUK Registrar wrote:
In <1107187539.008003.53550@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, "Rump
Ranger"
<buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote:
AUK Registrar wrote:
In <41fd59b0.544938@news.melbpc.org.au>,
(THOM)
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 13:11:46 +0300, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
So you consider car-bombing a Mosque a legitimate act of war?
its is traditional. Look how many churches we bombed in WW2
Right. It's a real shame all those smart bombs went off course in
WWII. Then
there's all those V-1 and V-2 rockets the Germans fired at England
...
If you're arguing that all Germans in Dresden were responsible for
British civilians dying and therefore desrved to fry,
Except that I'm not. That's not what this little part of the thread
is
about.
Sure it is.
Nice try though.
Nice dodge.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Campbell remove underscore" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
30 Jan 2005 04:52:10 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 22:12:59 GMT, (THOM) wrote:
So you consider car-bombing a Mosque a legitimate act of war?
its is traditional. Look how many churches we bombed in WW2
Name _one_ instance where a church was deliberately targeted during
services.
Amazing that you seem to think that there is nothing wrong with people
massacring others just because they practice a different version of
Islam.
And you want these people to rule Iraq - right?
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "THOM" |
|
| Title: Re: If deserters are "cowards", how can the military support one for President? |
31 Jan 2005 03:29:30 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 13:52:10 +0300, Colin Campbell
<activated_95b@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 22:12:59 GMT, (THOM) wrote:
So you consider car-bombing a Mosque a legitimate act of war?
its is traditional. Look how many churches we bombed in WW2
Name _one_ instance where a church was deliberately targeted during
services.
Amazing that you seem to think that there is nothing wrong with people
massacring others just because they practice a different version of
Islam.
No one said I did. I just pointed out that during WW2 the Allies
targeted churches and also remember that since the Vatican was also
part of the Axis we bombed it to though FDR put a stop to it fearing
catholics in the US Military would revolt.
And you want these people to rule Iraq - right?
No but I don't want Bush or any American corporation having one drop
of power in the new government either.
THOM
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
