Good article: Let's stop calling the left anti-war

[Hayabusa Rider]

So how is the antiwar left and the proterrorist right doing today?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Answer me this, what have I posted here that makes you believe I am a Liberal in the literal sense? The fact that I don't think the Dub is a good President? If that's all it takes then there are some Conservatives here that you could label as Liberals.

I didn't even mention liberal in my previous reply...

You sure did.

I just get a good laugh out of watching you participate in the circle jerk with the usual idiots.

Obviously I'm debating a child like individual who has little of substance too say but is long in infantile insults. Maybe you should tune in to Limbuagh or Hannity's show today so you could pick up some new Right Wing Extremist catch phrases to post in your thread to make up for their lack of substance.

 

[Pabster]

I'll tune in to Hannity's radio show today just for you.

Negative on the Limbaugh though. I haven't listened to him for years and don't have any plans to start.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Answer me this, what have I posted here that makes you believe I am a Liberal in the literal sense? The fact that I don't think the Dub is a good President? If that's all it takes then there are some Conservatives here that you could label as Liberals.

I didn't even mention liberal in my previous reply...

I just get a good laugh out of watching you participate in the circle jerk with the usual idiots.

You didn't? Interesting.

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Right Wing Extremists like Frackal who label everybody who disagrees with him an enemey of the State are just as dangerous in a Joseph MaCarthy type of way.

ROFLMAO. It is rather hilarious to watch the Blame America First / Anti-Bush / THE SKY IS FALLING!!! crowd label everyone who doesn't agree with their views as "right wing extremists". And WTF did McCarthy from? Wait...liberals always live in the past. Some of them are still debating Vietnam from the prior election

How's that crow taste, Pabster?

 

[imported_Condor]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Right Wing Extremists like Frackal who label everybody who disagrees with him an enemey of the State are just as dangerous in a Joseph MaCarthy type of way.

McCarthy was just pixxed because his native Democratic party wouldn't support him in his initial run for office and then came up with the witch hunt to stay in office. He did what is now a Democratic hallmark and played the superstitious paranoia of the voter base to stay in power. That was back when the Democratic party was one to be proud of and the Republicans were the rabble rousers.

link

 

[Starbuck1975]

Right Wing Extremists like Frackal who label everybody who disagrees with him an enemey of the State are just as dangerous in a Joseph MaCarthy type of way.

Kind of like anyone on this forum who defends Bush or declares themselves conservative is automatically dismissed as a NeoCon by the left fringe.

I don't know how many times I have discussed a point on this forum, only to be dismissed as taking my talking points from Rush Limbaugh. :roll:

And he's not the only one. There's been a veritable flood of these punks lately.

Maybe they will balance out the belligerent and immature left wing nutjobs who are already here.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Well, since there was no substantial terrorist activity in Iraq before the war, I suppose we could stop calling the so called right anti-terrorists, since their actions opened the door for Iraqi citizens to be blown up by them.

Way to go guys! You are pro-terrorist!

Goose meet gander.

So when a dictator kills his own people, it's not terrorism?

edit: terrorism: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

A lot more of that was going on under Saddam's dictatorship than is going on now, so I guess you could add pro-terrorist in addition to the anti-american label on such liberals.

edit: Oops, I see that recognition goes to Frackal for already pointing out that Michael Moore, Sheehan etc are pro-terrorist.

And for the link tards:

the death rate is running at the rate of about 45 dead per 100,000 population per year.

During Saddam?s long reign, the Iraqi death rate from democide (the government killing its own people) averaged over 100 per 100,000 a year.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Right Wing Extremists like Frackal who label everybody who disagrees with him an enemey of the State are just as dangerous in a Joseph MaCarthy type of way.

Kind of like anyone on this forum who defends Bush or declares themselves conservative is automatically dismissed as a NeoCon by the left fringe.

You'd really have to worry if the Left Fringe took a page from the Extreme Right and started labeling everybody that disagrees with them as being Anti-American

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Right Wing Extremists like Frackal who label everybody who disagrees with him an enemey of the State are just as dangerous in a Joseph MaCarthy type of way.

Kind of like anyone on this forum who defends Bush or declares themselves conservative is automatically dismissed as a NeoCon by the left fringe.

You'd really have to worry if the Left Fringe took a page from the Extreme Right and started labeling everybody that disagrees with them as being Anti-American

Shut up, Red - you goose-stepping Nazi.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Right Wing Extremists like Frackal who label everybody who disagrees with him an enemey of the State are just as dangerous in a Joseph MaCarthy type of way.

Kind of like anyone on this forum who defends Bush or declares themselves conservative is automatically dismissed as a NeoCon by the left fringe.

You'd really have to worry if the Left Fringe took a page from the Extreme Right and started labeling everybody that disagrees with them as being Anti-American

Shut up, Red - you goose-stepping Nazi.

Hey just because I happen to listen to Wagner's "Flight of the Valkyrie" before I post on P&N in the morning doesn't mean I'm a Nazi!

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Right Wing Extremists like Frackal who label everybody who disagrees with him an enemey of the State are just as dangerous in a Joseph MaCarthy type of way.

Kind of like anyone on this forum who defends Bush or declares themselves conservative is automatically dismissed as a NeoCon by the left fringe.

You'd really have to worry if the Left Fringe took a page from the Extreme Right and started labeling everybody that disagrees with them as being Anti-American

Shut up, Red - you goose-stepping Nazi.

Hey just because I happen to listen to Wagner's "Flight of the Valkyrie" before I post on P&N in the morning doesn't mean I'm a Nazi!

Cool. I listen to Beck - Loser.

 

[zendari]

The left fringe are just loud. They really have no substance or backing.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Well, since there was no substantial terrorist activity in Iraq before the war, I suppose we could stop calling the so called right anti-terrorists, since their actions opened the door for Iraqi citizens to be blown up by them.

Way to go guys! You are pro-terrorist!

Goose meet gander.

So when a dictator kills his own people, it's not terrorism?

edit: terrorism: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

A lot more of that was going on under Saddam's dictatorship than is going on now, so I guess you could add pro-terrorist in addition to the anti-american label on such liberals.

edit: Oops, I see that recognition goes to Frackal for already pointing out that Michael Moore, Sheehan etc are pro-terrorist.

And for the link tards:

the death rate is running at the rate of about 45 dead per 100,000 population per year.

During Saddam?s long reign, the Iraqi death rate from democide (the government killing its own people) averaged over 100 per 100,000 a year.

If you want to broaden the scope of terrorism beyond it's common useage fine. Then you can add the US to the list of terrorists, since we used Pinochet and the Shaw, and supported Saddam back in the day.

Your statistic is an interesting one. Your average is over his entire reign. What was it after we pulled his fangs so he couldn't attack the Kurds, or anyone else? What was it for a few years before we attacked the Iraqis? Was it "average"? Does your statistic include the Iraqis killed by our war on them as well as terrorist attacks? How many have we killed anyway?

You've called up numbers. Let's have a look at the data.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: zendari
The left fringe are just loud. They really have no substance or backing.

Anyone got some towels? We got some massive irony dripping here.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: NoSmirk

Ripjur you need to calm down man.. gonna blow a vein.

Who were you before you were banned?

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Well, since there was no substantial terrorist activity in Iraq before the war, I suppose we could stop calling the so called right anti-terrorists, since their actions opened the door for Iraqi citizens to be blown up by them.

Way to go guys! You are pro-terrorist!

Goose meet gander.

So when a dictator kills his own people, it's not terrorism?

edit: terrorism: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

A lot more of that was going on under Saddam's dictatorship than is going on now, so I guess you could add pro-terrorist in addition to the anti-american label on such liberals.

edit: Oops, I see that recognition goes to Frackal for already pointing out that Michael Moore, Sheehan etc are pro-terrorist.

And for the link tards:

the death rate is running at the rate of about 45 dead per 100,000 population per year.

During Saddam?s long reign, the Iraqi death rate from democide (the government killing its own people) averaged over 100 per 100,000 a year.

If you want to broaden the scope of terrorism beyond it's common useage fine. Then you can add the US to the list of terrorists, since we used Pinochet and the Shaw, and supported Saddam back in the day.

Your statistic is an interesting one. Your average is over his entire reign. What was it after we pulled his fangs so he couldn't attack the Kurds, or anyone else? What was it for a few years before we attacked the Iraqis? Was it "average"? Does your statistic include the Iraqis killed by our war on them as well as terrorist attacks? How many have we killed anyway?

You've called up numbers. Let's have a look at the data.

Did you even read the original article? Man I hate debating with idiots.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Brazen

So when a dictator kills his own people, it's not terrorism?

edit: terrorism: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

A lot more of that was going on under Saddam's dictatorship than is going on now, so I guess you could add pro-terrorist in addition to the anti-american label on such liberals.

edit: Oops, I see that recognition goes to Frackal for already pointing out that Michael Moore, Sheehan etc are pro-terrorist.

And for the link tards:

the death rate is running at the rate of about 45 dead per 100,000 population per year.

During Saddam?s long reign, the Iraqi death rate from democide (the government killing its own people) averaged over 100 per 100,000 a year.

This is a specious argument (and even that is being charitable). The lion's share of Saddam's mass killings of Iraqis happened during a time when he was on the US payroll, using chemical weapons made from American ingredients, sold to him with the permission of the Reagan administration.

I am endlessly entertained by people who raise this as a justification for war, when it wasn't even a justification for stopping our illegal weapons sales and currency transfers to Saddam back in the '80s, nor was it enough reason for GHWB to depose him following Operation Desert Storm.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: Brazen

So when a dictator kills his own people, it's not terrorism?

edit: terrorism: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

A lot more of that was going on under Saddam's dictatorship than is going on now, so I guess you could add pro-terrorist in addition to the anti-american label on such liberals.

edit: Oops, I see that recognition goes to Frackal for already pointing out that Michael Moore, Sheehan etc are pro-terrorist.

And for the link tards:

the death rate is running at the rate of about 45 dead per 100,000 population per year.

During Saddam?s long reign, the Iraqi death rate from democide (the government killing its own people) averaged over 100 per 100,000 a year.

This is a specious argument (and even that is being charitable). The lion's share of Saddam's mass killings of Iraqis happened during a time when he was on the US payroll, using chemical weapons made from American ingredients, sold to him with the permission of the Reagan administration.

I am endlessly entertained by people who raise this as a justification for war, when it wasn't even a justification for stopping our illegal weapons sales and currency transfers to Saddam back in the '80s, nor was it enough reason for GHWB to depose him following Operation Desert Storm.

So since we messed up back in the 80's, that means it is wrong for us to correct our mistake now?! To me THAT sounds like a specious argument. The fact of the matter is: Saddam killed people needlessly, with Saddam gone, fewer people are being killed. End of story.

edit: So I guess, by your reasoning, we should let go all any military vets who go psycho and snipe a bunch of innocent civilians for fun, since it was our military who trained them.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Brazen

So since we messed up back in the 80's, that means it is wrong for us to correct our mistake now?! To me THAT sounds like a specious argument. The fact of the matter is: Saddam killed people needlessly, with Saddam gone, fewer people are being killed. End of story.

edit: So I guess, by your reasoning, we should let go all any military vets who go psycho and snipe a bunch of innocent civilians for fun, since it was our military who trained them.

I was specifically referring to the death rate you cited as evidence. All of the known mass killings committed by SH were before the first Gulf War. Moreover, we have a long ignoble history of ignoring genocide and democide when it serves no strategic purpose to intervene (as is presently the case in Sudan). There's no way in hell Congress or the American public would have supported OIF if that had been the stated rationale.

For that matter, one has to seriously question whether fewer people are being killed today than were killed under SH. Even if we leave aside the vast number of civilians killed in the initial OIF bombing, present-day Iraq appears to know no bounds when it comes to murder and mayhem. I certainly don't argue - at all - that SH was anything better than a bloodthirsty monster, but this may be a situation in which an old devil is better than a new God.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: Brazen

So when a dictator kills his own people, it's not terrorism?

edit: terrorism: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

A lot more of that was going on under Saddam's dictatorship than is going on now, so I guess you could add pro-terrorist in addition to the anti-american label on such liberals.

edit: Oops, I see that recognition goes to Frackal for already pointing out that Michael Moore, Sheehan etc are pro-terrorist.

And for the link tards:

the death rate is running at the rate of about 45 dead per 100,000 population per year.

During Saddam?s long reign, the Iraqi death rate from democide (the government killing its own people) averaged over 100 per 100,000 a year.

This is a specious argument (and even that is being charitable). The lion's share of Saddam's mass killings of Iraqis happened during a time when he was on the US payroll, using chemical weapons made from American ingredients, sold to him with the permission of the Reagan administration.

I am endlessly entertained by people who raise this as a justification for war, when it wasn't even a justification for stopping our illegal weapons sales and currency transfers to Saddam back in the '80s, nor was it enough reason for GHWB to depose him following Operation Desert Storm.

So since we messed up back in the 80's, that means it is wrong for us to correct our mistake now?! To me THAT sounds like a specious argument. The fact of the matter is: Saddam killed people needlessly, with Saddam gone, fewer people are being killed. End of story.

edit: So I guess, by your reasoning, we should let go all any military vets who go psycho and snipe a bunch of innocent civilians for fun, since it was our military who trained them.

Americans didn't care about Iraqis dying back then and they really don't care about them dying today. I know it's callous but Americans are kind of fickle, they have a hard time feeling any sympathy for a people that hates them.

There is no way in hell the Dub would have gotten the American Public to support his "Excellent Adventure in Iraq" without misleading them about tthe Vast Quantities of WMD's that Hussien it now seems didn't have. If he would have just based his argument on invading Iraq on Hussiens treatment of his fellow Iraqi's Bush and his "Excellent Adventure"would have gone down in flames

 

[catnap1972]

Originally posted by: zendari
I really have no substance or backing and go off on batty rants just to get my post count up.

FIXED

:thumbsup:

 

[Proletariat]

Why the hell are there so many responses in this thread. All this guy did was post something from a conversative rag and instigate.

 

[Starbuck1975]

You'd really have to worry if the Left Fringe took a page from the Extreme Right and started labeling everybody that disagrees with them as being Anti-American

Well I doubt we have to worry about the left fringe labeling anyone anti-American, but some of them at least have been known to label conservatives as Nazis...when all else fails, demonize your opponent.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Why the hell are there so many responses in this thread. All this guy did was post something from a conversative rag and instigate.

Idiot trolls are like stupid, ugly women with really big tits and loud opinions. They garner lots of attention, and are often under the delusion that people are taking them seriously.

Everyone looks when a sh1t smeared sow breaks loose from the sty and enters a room. Everyone comments. In the end, though, it's still just a sh1t smeared sow.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

LOL @ Perknose. I've missed you around here lately, my friend.