• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Take to the streets you stupid hippies!

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Where are the hippies? After ten years, three nonstop wars, and a democratic president they've conceded this fight and shifted to the economy. Republicans might like fighting loosing battles and getting their teeth kicked in for no reason, but hippies have better things to do.
 
Cool pics of a 2003 protest I was there. Those 2 "punk dudes" are well known SFPD undercover that worked events back then. Like 2 before the guy with shades and pink sign is a total agent provocetur and can be seen filming anarchists from the open back of a SFPD paddywagon. One of the others is a inpendent rightie from the 'burbs (Called protest warriors back then)


None of those folks look like hippies even in 2003 pics.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Look? I look like a cop and have been to over 40 dead concerts. Can't judge a book by it's cover.

I don't drink milk but almond milk, eat granola for breakfast, and pesticide hormone free meats/vegis.
 
Last edited:
wuliheron said:
Where are the hippies? After ten years, three nonstop wars, and a democratic president they've conceded this fight and shifted to the economy. Republicans might like fighting loosing battles and getting their teeth kicked in for no reason, but hippies have better things to do.
Click to expand...

Uh no economy was kicking ass back when Clinton launched his wars of lies. The intellectual atmosphere of this country is so narrow when it comes to war, its a “choice” between partisan brands of interventionism. That's it. Not whether we should push out weight around at all and focus on our people. That's no accident.

There are few hippies left - and they might have short hair with names like Glenn Greewald, or Justin Raimondo, or Paul Craig Roberts but they sure as shit aint given air time by "mainstream" media.
 
Last edited:
I don't have a problem with it, no Americans are dying, it's not costing hundreds of billions of dollars and it's not making the Middle East/N.Africa more dangerous like that bullshit war in Iraq.
 
CallMeJoe said:
I have seen nothing to indicate that the United States military has taken any action against Libya since the sixty-day period passed; all reported missions have been conducted by other NATO members.
Do you have any information to the contrary?
Click to expand...

It was illegal from day one.
 
Red Dawn said:
I don't have a problem with it, no Americans are dying, it's not costing hundreds of billions of dollars and it's not making the Middle East/N.Africa more dangerous like that bullshit war in Iraq.
Click to expand...

So what is the upper limit to how much an illegal war costs us before you have a problem with it?
 
Darwin333 said:
It was illegal from day one.
Click to expand...
Can you explain how the War Powers Act deliniates our responsibilities under treaties? I'm curious if our NATO obligations in any way affect the applicability of the Act and am currently unable to search effectively since our company hired Mordac to handle our firewall and filters.
 
I dont think it has to do with who is in office. They protested..it did nothing..they gave up and went on with their lives. Im sure if Obama had started the wars instead of Bush they would be protesting him as well.
 
Here's a link to a far more informative article on this issue than this thread is:

http://www.npr.org/2011/05/20/136507004/despite-war-powers-deadline-congress-fails-to-act


The War Powers Act has had a pretty checkered history since it was passed in 1973. I don't think there has been a single President since then (from either party) that feels the law is constitutional but it hasn't been tested in court yet.

Let me play devil's advocate for a minute: if our relatively minor current involvement in Libya is legally a war, should we also be compelled to formally declare war on Pakistan, our nominal ally and recipient of billions of US foreign aid (and thus another crime, aid to enemy)? We have been attacking with drones, planes, helicopters and the occasional small troop invasion for years there.
 
TheRedUnderURBed said:
Cool pics of a 2003 protest I was there. Those 2 "punk dudes" are well known SFPD undercover that worked events back then. Like 2 before the guy with shades and pink sign is a total agent provocetur and can be seen filming anarchists from the open back of a SFPD paddywagon. One of the others is a inpendent rightie from the 'burbs (Called protest warriors back then)


None of those folks look like hippies even in 2003 pics.
Click to expand...

So you are steeplebot. Seems he told a similar story back in the day...
 
Just your typical dims and leftists in action. Vocally protesting when GWB did something, then completely ignoring obummer doing the exact same thing (or worse!). All this with the help of the "we're not biased, that's a myth!" media.
 
Bush went to congress. Obama didn't even bother with Yemen, Pakistan, Libya. Clinton didnt either wrt Balkans. Basically worse hypocrites.
 
TheRedUnderURBed said:
Cool pics of a 2003 protest I was there. Those 2 "punk dudes" are well known SFPD undercover that worked events back then. Like 2 before the guy with shades and pink sign is a total agent provocetur and can be seen filming anarchists from the open back of a SFPD paddywagon. One of the others is a inpendent rightie from the 'burbs (Called protest warriors back then)


None of those folks look like hippies even in 2003 pics.
Click to expand...

CADsortaGUY said:
So you are steeplebot. Seems he told a similar story back in the day...
Click to expand...

Seems I was right after all. Here is a little story that "steeplerot" told back in 2005:


Steeplerot said:
OK it's over the anarchists just walked in front of our house the black block is over.
A great effort they stopped suburban freeway traffic for at least 2 hours. :thumbsup:
Only 7-13 arrested and the cops never caught the bulk of them (but the cops were filming their tactics. :| I saw a big black dude in a paddy wagon following them for many blocks hanging out the back filming.
Click to expand...

Here is a list of other links showing reference to similar:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=15825531&postcount=23
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=15825734&postcount=33
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=15011752&postcount=57
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=15011791&postcount=60
 
UberNeuman said:
The outcry - Man! Where was the outcry about this worthless pursuit of Iraq - where were those bags of tea then?
Click to expand...

Your point may indeed be valid, but it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand. We can spend months talking about general hypocrisy. The fact remains that Obama is getting a virtual pass on this issue.
 
CADsortaGUY said:
Seems I was right after all. Here is a little story that "steeplerot" told back in 2005:




Here is a list of other links showing reference to similar:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=15825531&postcount=23
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=15825734&postcount=33
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=15011752&postcount=57
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=15011791&postcount=60
Click to expand...

128969327128307469.jpg


128767752332543242.jpg
 
DominionSeraph said:
So you're more just a straight-up retard like matt0611? Conservative because you're too dumb for anything else?
Click to expand...

Yes I must be a "conservative" because I happen to disagree with you. You are a moron as I have said numerous tomes I identify with no polticial ideology or political parties. I am all over the spectrum, just like everyone else. You just to weak to have your own opinions so you identify with a group and assume others must as well. You're just an arrogant idiot and I also believe I have said all of this before to you as well.
 
CallMeJoe said:
Can you explain how the War Powers Act deliniates our responsibilities under treaties? I'm curious if our NATO obligations in any way affect the applicability of the Act and am currently unable to search effectively since our company hired Mordac to handle our firewall and filters.
Click to expand...

This was a war of pure choice for both us and our allies. I am not familiar with the language of all of our treaties, I will post the specific language concerning treaties in the War powers act at the bottom. I do find it rather difficult to believe that we would have signed treaties that require us to go to war on the mere request of an ally when they are clearly not in imminent danger nor have they been attacked though. The "60 day" part is completely irrelevant because per the war powers act the war was illegal from the onset and imho there was absolutely no reason to not seek congressional approval before approving military strikes against a sovereign nation that posed zero threat to the United States or her allies (militarily at least).


(a) Inferences from any law or treaty
Authority to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations wherein involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances shall not be inferred—
(1) from any provision of law (whether or not in effect before November 7, 1973), including any provision contained in any appropriation Act, unless such provision specifically authorizes the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into such situations and states that it is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of this chapter; or
(2) from any treaty heretofore or hereafter ratified unless such treaty is implemented by legislation specifically authorizing the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into such situations and stating that it is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of this chapter.
 
DominionSeraph said:
1. Abu Ayyub al-Masri dead.

2. End of combat operations in Iraq.
Click to expand...

The guys on the ground that get shot at would disagree.

3. Combat forces withdrawn from Iraq.
Click to expand...

That sounds nice and all, but my buddy just went back and said that they are still getting mortared.

4. Osama Bin Laden dead.
Click to expand...

Which changed almost nothing.

Libya is just unmanned drone strikes. How is that a war?
Click to expand...

Shouldn't you be asking the people on the receiving end of those drone strikes if it's war? Where's the signs, and post of the dead civilians and children? The left are the most extreme partisan hypocrites in history.
 
PokerGuy said:
Just your typical dims and leftists in action. Vocally protesting when GWB did something, then completely ignoring obummer doing the exact same thing (or worse!). All this with the help of the "we're not biased, that's a myth!" media.
Click to expand...

But dude, he's not an evul conservative, corporate sock puppet, but not evul conservative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top