Civil War Brewing

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Let'm try to violently riot. They'll be in for a *nasty* suprise.
Except in Kommifornia, where everyone thinks the world is a peaceful place with no violence.......

They did, and they won against all the thugs with guns, and if you think that about californians you are twice as ignorant as you usually make out to be.

I dont recall anyone shooting in these riots.
And yes, I KNOW that about Kommifornians. They;ve voted away just about every bit of their 2nd. What should I think? They've willing voted a near complete ban on guns.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Let'm try to violently riot. They'll be in for a *nasty* suprise.
Except in Kommifornia, where everyone thinks the world is a peaceful place with no violence.......

They did, and they won against all the thugs with guns, and if you think that about californians you are twice as ignorant as you usually make out to be.

I dont recall anyone shooting in these riots.
And yes, I KNOW that about Kommifornians. They;ve voted away just about every bit of their 2nd. What should I think? They've willing voted a near complete ban on guns.

First, the french police are armed, and

No, that was SF not california. And who cares? Some people don't want guns, as righties like to put it, pull yourself up by the bootsraps and haul ass to another place if you think you need them for some reason in a urban area. It is obvious from our crime rates and the weapon of choice what guns do to communitys.

 

[OFFascist]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Some people don't want guns

If you dont want guns then dont buy them, but to deny others thier rights is wrong.

It is obvious from our crime rates and the weapon of choice what guns do to communitys.

My two handguns and SKS have not done any harm to my community. Guns are not the problem, the war on drugs is the problem. It is a problem that is more pronounced in some parts of this country than in others.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti

Originally posted by: piasabird
I see a civil war coming if we do not close the Mexican border.

This is a divididng issue that will cause a civil war if left unchecked.

Isn't a civil war something that happens within a country? not country against another?

However, I do see something bad happening, I doubt it will go to the level of a civil war, but the outcome of this illegal immigrant issue is not looking good, gonna be some very pissed off people no matter the decision.
If it's for kicking out the illegals, making them felons, that roughly 15,000,000 people. If it goes the other way and the US citizens are pissed, there could be rioting in the streets. I really don't think it will spill south though.

Isn't a civil war something that happens within a country? not country against another?
Yes. And according to Stephen Colbert what is happening in Iraq is a civil war so by definition the U.S. is not involved.
Mission Accomplished!

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: OFFascist

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Some people don't want guns

If you dont want guns then dont buy them, but to deny others thier rights is wrong.

It is obvious from our crime rates and the weapon of choice what guns do to communitys.

My two handguns and SKS have not done any harm to my community. Guns are not the problem, the war on drugs is the problem. It is a problem that is more pronounced in some parts of this country than in others.

They may not in your hands, but when some tweaker breaks in when you are not home and steals them they will be.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Xcobra

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: EatSpam
If there was any civil war, I would hope that it would between the poor Mexicans and the small Rich minority who run Mexico.

Seriously, the current political situation in Mexico is a Republican wet dream. There's a relative handful of really rich people who run Mexico and everyone else is poor. And the United States is Mexico's welfare system.

Fix Mexico and you'll solve our illegal immigrant problem and make life better for millions of Mexicans. Its a win-win for everyone involved - except the rich folks taking advantage of the status quo, of course.

Small rich, big poor. That sounds like a socialists wet dream to me.

socialist huh?

What do you think the Soviet Union, Cuba, Vietnam, China, the Eastern Block looked like under Socialism?

Small group of rich controlling large groups of poor.

You know, your lack of knowledge about these things is absolutely amazing.

I'm sorry, I have to reply. You are an ignorant.

FYI, the difference betwen rich and poor in Eastern Europe and Russia is ten times greater today, under capitalism, than it was under communism.

Everyone had a job, even if it didn't pay much.

But the rich, the people in power, were not driving Mercedes cars and flaunting their wealth, like the newly rich do today.

You have no idea what socialism is, just shut up instead of talking nonsense. Look at Sweden's quality of life, go to political science school for a couple of years, travel around the world and learn a few things, then you can talk.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Xcobra

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: EatSpam
If there was any civil war, I would hope that it would between the poor Mexicans and the small Rich minority who run Mexico.

Seriously, the current political situation in Mexico is a Republican wet dream. There's a relative handful of really rich people who run Mexico and everyone else is poor. And the United States is Mexico's welfare system.

Fix Mexico and you'll solve our illegal immigrant problem and make life better for millions of Mexicans. Its a win-win for everyone involved - except the rich folks taking advantage of the status quo, of course.

Small rich, big poor. That sounds like a socialists wet dream to me.

socialist huh?

What do you think the Soviet Union, Cuba, Vietnam, China, the Eastern Block looked like under Socialism?

Small group of rich controlling large groups of poor.

You know, your lack of knowledge about these things is absolutely amazing.

I'm sorry, I have to reply. You are an ignorant.

FYI, the difference betwen rich and poor in Eastern Europe and Russia is ten times greater today, under capitalism, than it was under communism.

Everyone had a job, even if it didn't pay much.

But the rich, the people in power, were not driving Mercedes cars and flaunting their wealth, like the newly rich do today.

You have no idea what socialism is, just shut up instead of talking nonsense. Look at Sweden's quality of life, go to political science school for a couple of years, travel around the world and learn a few things, then you can talk.

Go Anita Go

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: OFFascist

Originally posted by: Genx87
It will happen when a nuke is detonated in a major us city and found to have been smuggled across the unprotect open to the world mexican border.

Why the ****** would Islamic terrorists want to try to smuggle a bomb across the Mexican border.

Its easier to do it across the Canadian border, where they wouldnt have to risk crossing paths with human or drug smugglers like on the Mexican border. Also the Canadian border is much less defended on either side.

Easier still would be to boat it into the US.

Doesnt matter, the entry will be an "unprotected" border point.

 

[piasabird]

How can you tell a murderer it is against the law to kill and give amnesty to people who broke the law?

We are teaching people it is ok to break any law as long as you get what you want!

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Xcobra

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: EatSpam
If there was any civil war, I would hope that it would between the poor Mexicans and the small Rich minority who run Mexico.

Seriously, the current political situation in Mexico is a Republican wet dream. There's a relative handful of really rich people who run Mexico and everyone else is poor. And the United States is Mexico's welfare system.

Fix Mexico and you'll solve our illegal immigrant problem and make life better for millions of Mexicans. Its a win-win for everyone involved - except the rich folks taking advantage of the status quo, of course.

Small rich, big poor. That sounds like a socialists wet dream to me.

socialist huh?

What do you think the Soviet Union, Cuba, Vietnam, China, the Eastern Block looked like under Socialism?

Small group of rich controlling large groups of poor.

You know, your lack of knowledge about these things is absolutely amazing.

I'm sorry, I have to reply. You are an ignorant.

FYI, the difference betwen rich and poor in Eastern Europe and Russia is ten times greater today, under capitalism, than it was under communism.

Everyone had a job, even if it didn't pay much.

But the rich, the people in power, were not driving Mercedes cars and flaunting their wealth, like the newly rich do today.

You have no idea what socialism is, just shut up instead of talking nonsense. Look at Sweden's quality of life, go to political science school for a couple of years, travel around the world and learn a few things, then you can talk.

Who controlled the Soviet Union? Was it the peasants or the 1 million or so communist party members? btw who controls most of the industry in the former Soviet union and its republics? Many of those old party bosses. Hmm how did they gain the economic wealth to do so?

Same for the satellite states. How about China before the recent trend towards a more open market?

Sweden is a mixed economy like ours, a little more socialist but nothing like the Soviet Union.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: piasabird
How can you tell a murderer it is against the law to kill and give amnesty to people who broke the law?

We are teaching people it is ok to break any law as long as you get what you want!

Maybe we should all turn ourselves into the british authorities then?

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Let'm try to violently riot. They'll be in for a *nasty* suprise.
Except in Kommifornia, where everyone thinks the world is a peaceful place with no violence.......

They did, and they won against all the thugs with guns, and if you think that about californians you are twice as ignorant as you usually make out to be.

I dont recall anyone shooting in these riots.
And yes, I KNOW that about Kommifornians. They;ve voted away just about every bit of their 2nd. What should I think? They've willing voted a near complete ban on guns.

First, the french police are armed, and

No, that was SF not california. And who cares? Some people don't want guns, as righties like to put it, pull yourself up by the bootsraps and haul ass to another place if you think you need them for some reason in a urban area. It is obvious from our crime rates and the weapon of choice what guns do to communitys.

Right, and the French police did a damn fine job protecting peoples property. Kudos to them.......

And its fine you dont want to own guns. But you never struck me as the type of person who would deny others their Constitutional rights.
Hell, your probably hoping for all out facist right? Hail Hitler, Salute Stalin right?

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Sweden is a mixed economy like ours, a little more socialist but nothing like the Soviet Union.

*slaps forehead*

That is becasue they are modern SOCIALIST not communist-stalinist regimes it is you who are putting the two together.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Right, and the French police did a damn fine job protecting peoples property. Kudos to them.......

Property or peoples lives? It is obvious which one you value more. (and you have the nerve to try to assosiate me with dictators lol)

Guns do not make a civil society, plenty of countries are fine without, it is only the gun nuts who swear they can protect themselves against a out of control US government's F-16 bombs with their handgun. :roll:

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Right, and the French police did a damn fine job protecting peoples property. Kudos to them.......

Property or peoples lives? It is obvious which one you value more. (and you have the nerve to try to assosiate me with dictators lol)

Guns do not make a civil society, plenty of countries are fine without, it is only the gun nuts who swear they are going to protect themselves against a F-16 with a handgun. :roll:

I value them nearly equally. A persons live is tied to his possessions. If you take a mans car, he might not be able to work.

Since you dont value property, can I have your video card?
Seriously.
Mines older then dirt.

Otherwise, facts proive you wrong. Crime has dropped in areas that issued CCW's.
You can be led around the nose by your emotions all you want, it doesnt change the facts.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87

Sweden is a mixed economy like ours, a little more socialist but nothing like the Soviet Union.

*slaps forehead*

That is becasue they are modern SOCIALIST not communist-stalinist regimes it is you who are putting the two together.

Thank you pointing out the obvious as I said above when I said Sweden is a mixed economy, which was to imply it was nothing like the Soviet Union, again as stated.

They grow them bright from where you come from dont they?

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Right, and the French police did a damn fine job protecting peoples property. Kudos to them.......

Property or peoples lives? It is obvious which one you value more. (and you have the nerve to try to assosiate me with dictators lol)

Guns do not make a civil society, plenty of countries are fine without, it is only the gun nuts who swear they are going to protect themselves against a F-16 with a handgun. :roll:

I value them nearly equally. A persons live is tied to his possessions. If you take a mans car, he might not be able to work.

Since you dont value property, can I have your video card?
Seriously.
Mines older then dirt.

Sure, if you contribute something equally worthy to compensate, But, if someones life depended on it, or it would help science then fine, it's only a card.

 

[Circlenaut]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Too many seem fixated on the "illegal" part of Illegal Immigrant. Along the same lines as "drugs are bad because they are illegal!" arguement. Like I said in another thread on the same subject, I think 90% of those complaing about "illegal immigrants" would stop complaining if amnesty(making illegals legal) were granted. They simply would no longer have a reason to be riled up about it.

The next time anyone gets worked up about the reported 12 million "illegals" consider the size of that number for a moment. That's a lot of people, doing a lot of Jobs, buying a lot of stuff, renting a lot of Homes. Also consider that there's no way you could deport them even if you wanted to, they are simply too numerous. Consider that the SS problem is due to a Demographic problem and these 12 million fit into the demographic where low numbers are a major factor in that problem. Consider all that and also that all the arguements of "they don't pay Taxes" and "they use up our services for free" would instantly vanish by granting them amnesty. Amnesty is a win-win situation.

Here, here!

I love it when people use the "because they're illegal argument" as well. What do you think congress is doing right now? They're trying to CHANGE the law so these people are NOT illegal. So all arguments using legality as a negative is mute. Some law will pass and guarantee you somehow these 12 million or part of, will become legal. And wtf is up with the legal immigrants saying "These people are not speaking on behalf of the legal population!" Hello! Think 1986 amnesty. Illegal immigrants at that time where illegal and bam they became legal, destroying the illegal argument.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Genx87


Thank you pointing out the obvious as I said above when I said Sweden is a mixed economy, which was to imply it was nothing like the Soviet Union, again as stated.

They grow them bright from where you come from dont they?

Every one of the countries you listed were totalitarian regimes under the guise of communism. "a socialists wet dream", you obviously are lacking the basic concept that socialism does not = totalitarian communist regimes. :roll:

It sure makes a cute talking point though for historiclly-challenged right wingers to lap up.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Pippy

Originally posted by: sandorski
Too many seem fixated on the "illegal" part of Illegal Immigrant. Along the same lines as "drugs are bad because they are illegal!" arguement. Like I said in another thread on the same subject, I think 90% of those complaing about "illegal immigrants" would stop complaining if amnesty(making illegals legal) were granted. They simply would no longer have a reason to be riled up about it.

The next time anyone gets worked up about the reported 12 million "illegals" consider the size of that number for a moment. That's a lot of people, doing a lot of Jobs, buying a lot of stuff, renting a lot of Homes. Also consider that there's no way you could deport them even if you wanted to, they are simply too numerous. Consider that the SS problem is due to a Demographic problem and these 12 million fit into the demographic where low numbers are a major factor in that problem. Consider all that and also that all the arguements of "they don't pay Taxes" and "they use up our services for free" would instantly vanish by granting them amnesty. Amnesty is a win-win situation.

Here, here!

I love it when people use the "because they're illegal argument" as well. What do you think congress is doing right now? They're trying to CHANGE the law so these people are NOT illegal. So all arguments using legality as a negative is mute. Some law will pass and guarantee you somehow these 12 million or part of, will become legal. And wtf is up with the legal immigrants saying "These people are not speaking on behalf of the legal population!" Hello! Think 1986 amnesty. Illegal immigrants at that time where illegal and bam they became legal, destroying the illegal argument.

They are too stupid to make the economic and social arguments so "illegal" is a generic opposition position they can form words with which they can't discribe.

 

[TGS]

Originally posted by: Genx87
It will happen when a nuke is detonated in a major us city and found to have been smuggled across the unprotect open to the world mexican border.

You do realize the biggest terrorist threats prior to 9/11 were Americans attacking Americans, right? I think a good hard look at our foreign policy would do worlds more for our country than throwing a few more eyes on the border would ever do. The enemy of my enemy is my friend != foreign policy.

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Right, and the French police did a damn fine job protecting peoples property. Kudos to them.......

Property or peoples lives? It is obvious which one you value more. (and you have the nerve to try to assosiate me with dictators lol)

Guns do not make a civil society, plenty of countries are fine without, it is only the gun nuts who swear they are going to protect themselves against a F-16 with a handgun. :roll:

I value them nearly equally. A persons live is tied to his possessions. If you take a mans car, he might not be able to work.

Since you dont value property, can I have your video card?
Seriously.
Mines older then dirt.

Otherwise, facts proive you wrong. Crime has dropped in areas that issued CCW's.
You can be led around the nose by your emotions all you want, it doesnt change the facts.

Wow...just wow. A car is almost worth as much as someones life. Do you sell car insurance by chance? A perons life is not tied to their possessions. A persons possessions serve to improve ones life. If my car was wrecked today, I don't magically turn into dust. I file my insurance paper work and get a rental while repairs are done. If I didn't have insurance I could go down and buy another car. I started working without a car, so even then I couldn't rely on what I didn't have to be gainfully employeed.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Zorba

Originally posted by: OrByte
same thing was said about abortion

same thing was said about gay marraige

and now the cocktail for the masses is immigration

why can't you people see through the smokescreens!?!?!?!

wedge-issue

This is not a typical wedge-issue like abortion. This is a serious issue that could have a massive impact on everyone in the US. You can't have "Homeland Security" without protecting your borders and ports. And you can't get a fair wage when someone is willing to take your job for less than minimum wage.

Heh, I kindly disagree. What would happen to you if some illegal got a job? what would happen to you if some illegals got shipped back to their home country? what would happen to you if some illegals all magically became legal?

answer to all of the above? NOTHING.

It is atypical only in the sense that there is a fiscal/economical impact as opposed to abortion/gay marriage where the impact is negligible. But the fact of the matter is this is an issue manufactured and made critical today by our media and government, for the sole purpose of distracting/polarizing the masses. Distracting from what you ask?

Iraq
Oil
Economy
*insert your latest administration gaffle/goof up here*

there is a whole laundry list of things that we should be addressing now. Instead, we are wrapped up in illegal immigration.

why? Who proposed and sponsored the house bill that started this whole mess?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87


Thank you pointing out the obvious as I said above when I said Sweden is a mixed economy, which was to imply it was nothing like the Soviet Union, again as stated.

They grow them bright from where you come from dont they?

Every one of the countries you listed were totalitarian regimes under the guise of communism. "a socialists wet dream", you obviously are lacking the basic concept that socialism does not = totalitarian communist regimes. :roll:

It sure makes a cute talking point though for historiclly-challenged right wingers to lap up.

What else has the socialist regime in power done? You name me one pure socialist country that hasnt had a small ruling party or group of people with a large poor population below them?

How does a govt controlling everything from private property to wages not become totalitarian in nature? You have a small group of people who hold all the economic and political power over everybody else. Hence this is a perfect example of this wet dream the person I was responding to described which was "Seriously, the current political situation in Mexico is a Republican wet dream. There's a relative handful of really rich people who run Mexico and everyone else is poor."

That is the Soviet Union in a nutshell.

Sweden again is not a pure "socialist" nation but a "mixed economy" nation like ours. The Soviets were socialist, not a mixed economy like ours or swedens. Sweden was not my example btw in case you arent paying attention.

 

[Genx87]

You do realize the biggest terrorist threats prior to 9/11 were Americans attacking Americans, right? I think a good hard look at our foreign policy would do worlds more for our country than throwing a few more eyes on the border would ever do. The enemy of my enemy is my friend != foreign policy.

You think or you know? You willing to risk a few million lives for that open border policy?

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Genx87

You do realize the biggest terrorist threats prior to 9/11 were Americans attacking Americans, right? I think a good hard look at our foreign policy would do worlds more for our country than throwing a few more eyes on the border would ever do. The enemy of my enemy is my friend != foreign policy.

You think or you know? You willing to risk a few million lives for that open border policy?

using fear to get your way again?

tsk tsk tsk.

oops forgot smiley

😛