If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Times)   RON PAUL has already won. This is bad news for anyone not named RON PAUL   (communities.washingtontimes.com) divider line 187
    More: Obvious, Ron Paul, American Conservatism, Ludwig von Mises, Republican nomination, F.A. Hayek, nation-building, Rocky Balboa, Big Story  
•       •       •

4823 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 May 2012 at 10:27 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



187 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-27 01:55:54 PM  

pmdgrwr: It is funny reading people bash Paul in a childish manner trying to belittle him. At the same time ignoring how his stances are being takening up by both parties who are then claiming those ideas as original thoughts completely ignoring who originated them. I like how those who belittle Paul fail to elaborate how or why policies currently in place are beneficial or actually working. Another funny thing is how those soldiers who are at war are saying our policies are no longer viable and a complete waste are ignored and while politicians and farkers who have no stake in their own claims seem to think those policies are viable and refuse to put a stake into their claims.


Funny +1. Would funny again.
 
2012-05-27 02:59:18 PM  

BronyMedic: whY dO yOu think I creAted ^THIS^???

Because you suck at photoshop, and want to oversimplify a complex point to exploit a few like-minded libertarians for a laugh?

Just the first thought that springs to mind.



Photoshop?

Try MS Paint.


/And yes, I suck at MS Paint
 
2012-05-27 03:25:26 PM  

StokeyBob: Amos Quito: urban.derelict: Amos Quito: That's too bad, because had you continued reading you would have understood that it was a combination of policies that killed our industries.

THE farkING TWO PARTY SYSTEM, YOU farkING RETARD, THE farkING ILLUSION OF A farkING CHOICE

[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 640x176]

/[lh3.googleusercontent.com image 550x499]


[i1121.photobucket.com image 619x605]

dUH!!11!!

whY dO yOu think I creAted ^THIS^???


Your the guy that made that one.

I own you an apology I suppose as I have re-hosted your picture a few times.

I would also like to thank you for making it. It says so much.

Amos Quito 2012



LOL, and thanks!
 
2012-05-27 03:49:34 PM  
As Americans mindlessly celebrate another Memorial Day with cookouts, beer and burgers, the U.S. war machine keeps churning. As we brutally enforce our will on foreign countries, we create more people that hate us. They don't hate us for our freedom. They hate us because we have invaded and occupied their countries. They hate us because we kill innocent people with predator drones. They hate us for our hypocrisy regarding democracy and freedom. Just when we had the opportunity to make a sensible decision by leaving Iraq and exiting the Middle East quagmire, Obama made the abysmal choice to casually sacrifice more troops in the Afghan shthole. We have thrown over $1.3 trillion down Middle East rat holes over the last 11 years with no discernible benefit to the citizens of the United States. George Bush and Barack Obama did this to prove they were true statesmen. The Soviet Union killed over 1 million Afghans, while driving another 5 million out of the country and retreated as a bankrupted and defeated shell after ten years. Young Americans continue to die, for whom and for what? Our foreign policy during the last eleven years can be summed up in one military term, SNAFU - Situation Normal All Fked Up. These endless foreign interventions under the guise of a War on Terror are a smoke screen for what is really going on in this country. When a government has unsolvable domestic problems, they try to distract the willfully ignorant masses by proactively creating foreign conflicts based upon false pretenses.
 
2012-05-27 04:42:43 PM  
The Afghanistan war did not bankrupt the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was already on its way down.

As for the rest of that, it's sad that you think that hate and simple-minded thinking is the solution to hate and simple-minded thinking. The world is a very complex place, and you're being no better than the people you despise - and just as wrong, if not more so.
 
2012-05-27 05:29:48 PM  

pmdgrwr: It is funny reading people bash Paul in a childish manner trying to belittle him. At the same time ignoring how his stances are being takening up by both parties who are then claiming those ideas as original thoughts completely ignoring who originated them.


I challenge you to name one position taken by Ron Paul that is now a policy favored by a majority or even a significant minority of the elected representatives of the Democratic Party.
 
2012-05-27 05:39:11 PM  

pmdgrwr: As Americans mindlessly celebrate another Memorial Day with cookouts, beer and burgers, the U.S. war machine keeps churning. As we brutally enforce our will on foreign countries, we create more people that hate us. They don't hate us for our freedom. They hate us because we have invaded and occupied their countries. They hate us because we kill innocent people with predator drones. They hate us for our hypocrisy regarding democracy and freedom. Just when we had the opportunity to make a sensible decision by leaving Iraq


Of course, Obama would never have withdrawn our forces from Iraq unless Ron Paul had made him do it.

pmdgrwr: When a government has unsolvable domestic problems, they try to distract the willfully ignorant masses by proactively creating foreign conflicts based upon false pretenses.


Under which false pretenses did we invade Afghanistan, in your opinion?
 
2012-05-27 05:57:14 PM  

o5iiawah: If anything, he is the voice of the person, who over the last decade or so has seen his rights and his property diminish with the only answer from government being: "thats democracy folks!" If anything, people need to be reminded that we do not have a democracy. We have a republic. if you're still skeptical, there may be a few schoolhouse rock videos out there that go through the nitty gritty of how our government works.



A Republic is a representative democracy. And all you Paultards voted for Bush in 2000 and most also in 04. You're a bunch of hypocrites who suddenly cry about government power and spending only when you're not in power.
 
2012-05-27 05:59:52 PM  

pmdgrwr: At the same time ignoring how his stances are being takening up by both parties who are then claiming those ideas as original thoughts completely ignoring who originated them.


So Paul was the first person to be anti-war and pro-drug legalization? I think you mean he stole other peoples opinions then pretended they originated with him. From the mortgage crisis prediction stolen from others to the anti-war stances by Progressives since Vietnam to the anti-drug war stance also by progressives since the harsh 1980's targeted minorities in ghettos.

The only original thought Paul had was to merge the positives of progressives like corruption in regulatory agencies and revolving doors in government and business with the crazies of conservatives like gold standards, gutting regulation, free market, Darwinism, and hardline Christian social stances.

Idiots like you eat it up.
 
2012-05-27 06:01:08 PM  

pmdgrwr: Our foreign policy during the last eleven years can be summed up in one military term, SNAFU - Situation Normal All Fked Up. These endless foreign interventions under the guise of a War on Terror are a smoke screen for what is really going on in this country. When a government has unsolvable domestic problems, they try to distract the willfully ignorant masses by proactively creating foreign conflicts based upon false pretenses.



You and the rest of the military voted for it for 8 years, reap what you sow, idiots. Only Republicans are your protectors and can defend the country properly, now keep farking that chicken and like it.
 
2012-05-27 06:55:46 PM  

tirob: pmdgrwr: As Americans mindlessly celebrate another Memorial Day with cookouts, beer and burgers, the U.S. war machine keeps churning. As we brutally enforce our will on foreign countries, we create more people that hate us. They don't hate us for our freedom. They hate us because we have invaded and occupied their countries. They hate us because we kill innocent people with predator drones. They hate us for our hypocrisy regarding democracy and freedom. Just when we had the opportunity to make a sensible decision by leaving Iraq

Of course, Obama would never have withdrawn our forces from Iraq unless Ron Paul had made him do it.

pmdgrwr: When a government has unsolvable domestic problems, they try to distract the willfully ignorant masses by proactively creating foreign conflicts based upon false pretenses.

Under which false pretenses did we invade Afghanistan, in your opinion?


So if a German or a Mexican commits a terroistic act then we invade Germany or Mexico? There are terrorist all around the world do we invade every country? People like you who favored going to Afganistan just got your feelings hurt because of 9/11 and being the simple minded person you are your only response was to send others to war that has gone on for so long and costed so much with still no end in sight, we had to hand it off to nato. Third world thugs with guns from the 80's schooled a high tech military and you are bitter about that too.

People like you thought it would be a short war only a few months because hell what damage could backwards cave dwellers do, right. So much wasted never to be gotten back but that is ok we will just finance it with loans from china, never mind the fact we have to borrow money just to maintain government much less fight wars. But that is ok as long as scary sht my pants terrorist don't hurt you. Stop hiding behind corrupted politicians thinking they will throw you a bone while you support their whims.
 
2012-05-27 07:12:05 PM  

intelligent comment below: And all you Paultards voted for Bush in 2000 and most also in 04.


citationplease.jpg
 
2012-05-27 07:30:18 PM  

pmdgrwr: So if a German or a Mexican commits a terroistic act then we invade Germany or Mexico? There are terrorist all around the world do we invade every country? People like you who favored going to Afganistan just got your feelings hurt because of 9/11 and being the simple minded person you are your only response was to send others to war that has gone on for so long and costed so much with still no end in sight, we had to hand it off to nato. Third world thugs with guns from the 80's schooled a high tech military and you are bitter about that too.

People like you thought it would be a short war only a few months because hell what damage could backwards cave dwellers do, right. So much wasted never to be gotten back but that is ok we will just finance it with loans from china, never mind the fact we have to borrow money just to maintain government much less fight wars. But that is ok as long as scary sht my pants terrorist don't hurt you. Stop hiding behind corrupted politicians thinking they will throw you a bone while you support their whims.


Your objection would make sense if the terrorists were Afghani. They weren't. So try again: why did we go into Afghanistan?
 
2012-05-27 07:30:40 PM  

intelligent comment below: pmdgrwr: At the same time ignoring how his stances are being takening up by both parties who are then claiming those ideas as original thoughts completely ignoring who originated them.

So Paul was the first person to be anti-war and pro-drug legalization? I think you mean he stole other peoples opinions then pretended they originated with him. From the mortgage crisis prediction stolen from others to the anti-war stances by Progressives since Vietnam to the anti-drug war stance also by progressives since the harsh 1980's targeted minorities in ghettos.

The only original thought Paul had was to merge the positives of progressives like corruption in regulatory agencies and revolving doors in government and business with the crazies of conservatives like gold standards, gutting regulation, free market, Darwinism, and hardline Christian social stances.

Idiots like you eat it up.


Yea you are right they are no original to him my falt. But he has be unwavering on his stances no matter how unpopular they are. You I guess like a flip flopper as long as they say what you want to hear, never mind they would changed their stances just to get the most votes. So how would you know if they really support your ideas if they just change theirs to get your vote? (I know because they are politicians and never lie and mislead you.) I rather eat what Paul serves than to eat what you are having, I know where I stand its you who like to do what is popular at the moment, to afraid to be laughed, at ridiclued and made fun of on fark for not wanting to be part of the popular crowd. Let me ask this did you favor military occupation of Afganistan before 9/11? Did you favor bailing out banks and financial institutions before the economic collapse?
 
2012-05-27 07:31:35 PM  

pmdgrwr: tirob:
Under which false pretenses did we invade Afghanistan, in your opinion?

So if a German or a Mexican commits a terroistic act then we invade Germany or Mexico?


1. That's not an answer to the question I asked.

2. If the German or Mexican is sent here with the support of the people who effectively run Germany or Mexico and kills three thousand people, and if there is every indication that such acts will continue to happen unless we do something about it, what would you suggest we do?

pmdgrwr: tirob: People like you who favored going to Afganistan just got your feelings hurt because of 9/11


That's not a fact. Don't tell me what I think.

pmdgrwr: tirob: Third world thugs with guns from the 80's schooled a high tech military and you are bitter about that too.

1. You did it again.
2. Whose side are you on?

pmdgrwr: tirob: People like you thought it would be a short war only a few months


And you did it again. I never thought any such thing.
 
2012-05-27 07:41:28 PM  

Ricardo Klement: pmdgrwr: So if a German or a Mexican commits a terroistic act then we invade Germany or Mexico? There are terrorist all around the world do we invade every country? People like you who favored going to Afganistan just got your feelings hurt because of 9/11 and being the simple minded person you are your only response was to send others to war that has gone on for so long and costed so much with still no end in sight, we had to hand it off to nato. Third world thugs with guns from the 80's schooled a high tech military and you are bitter about that too.

People like you thought it would be a short war only a few months because hell what damage could backwards cave dwellers do, right. So much wasted never to be gotten back but that is ok we will just finance it with loans from china, never mind the fact we have to borrow money just to maintain government much less fight wars. But that is ok as long as scary sht my pants terrorist don't hurt you. Stop hiding behind corrupted politicians thinking they will throw you a bone while you support their whims.

Your objection would make sense if the terrorists were Afghani. They weren't. So try again: why did we go into Afghanistan?


I never said those who were responsible for 9/11 were from afganistan, I was just asking. But I can understand your objection. Why did we go, Taliban? Bin Laden? Taliban support for Bin Laden? Training camps? Opium production? Weed production? Muslim exteremist? They hate our freedoms? We were just mad? What about the Suadi financial support? Do not forget that they learned to fly here in the US not Afganistan.
 
2012-05-27 08:05:02 PM  

tirob: pmdgrwr: tirob:
Under which false pretenses did we invade Afghanistan, in your opinion?

So if a German or a Mexican commits a terroistic act then we invade Germany or Mexico?

1. That's not an answer to the question I asked.

2. If the German or Mexican is sent here with the support of the people who effectively run Germany or Mexico and kills three thousand people, and if there is every indication that such acts will continue to happen unless we do something about it, what would you suggest we do?

Suck it up lick your wounds, you are an american right, remember land of the free home of the brave? Be brave about it. Not some war hungry follower with no intention on volunteering.
You seem to have no problem with the killing of tens of thousands of innocent Afganis right, your thoughts would suggest those innocent afaganis should fight us back, perpetuating a war. But I guess you did not think about that, what is 20k afganis compared to 3k US citizens. They should just suck it up because we are America Fuk Yea.

pmdgrwr: tirob: People like you who favored going to Afganistan just got your feelings hurt because of 9/11

That's not a fact. Don't tell me what I think.

Sounds like I am right and your feelings are hurt again

pmdgrwr: tirob: Third world thugs with guns from the 80's schooled a high tech military and you are bitter about that too.

1. You did it again.
Did what, point out the war is a failure, would you suggest keep fighting for another 10 yrs. Hell the Nazis, which were well organized fell quicker.
2. Whose side are you on? A free America

pmdgrwr: tirob: People like you thought it would be a short war only a few months

And you did it again. I never thought any such thing.

Would you have supported it if it meant ten yrs without an end and money we have to borrow, did you forget Vietnam. Yes they voluteered, but they voluteered to defend our country from foreign armies not knee jerk reaction by politicans looking to be tough on terrorist. Yes there were people who joined after 9/11 to go fight, ask those who are dead ask their famlies how they feel now. What about the families who children fathers and mothers are permanently injured never to be able to care for themselves or provide for their families. What about those who will never recover mentally from witnessing the traumas of war. But that is not for you to deal with, it is someone elses problem.

 
2012-05-27 08:05:04 PM  

Ricardo Klement: pmdgrwr: So if a German or a Mexican commits a terroistic act then we invade Germany or Mexico? There are terrorist all around the world do we invade every country? People like you who favored going to Afganistan just got your feelings hurt because of 9/11 and being the simple minded person you are your only response was to send others to war that has gone on for so long and costed so much with still no end in sight, we had to hand it off to nato. Third world thugs with guns from the 80's schooled a high tech military and you are bitter about that too.

People like you thought it would be a short war only a few months because hell what damage could backwards cave dwellers do, right. So much wasted never to be gotten back but that is ok we will just finance it with loans from china, never mind the fact we have to borrow money just to maintain government much less fight wars. But that is ok as long as scary sht my pants terrorist don't hurt you. Stop hiding behind corrupted politicians thinking they will throw you a bone while you support their whims.

Your objection would make sense if the terrorists were Afghani. They weren't. So try again: why did we go into Afghanistan?



We hate them for their freedoms?
 
2012-05-27 08:20:44 PM  
I'm sure nobody's reading this thread at this point, but this showed up in my Facebook feed, and I literally laughed out loud at it. I just had to share.

fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net

/yes, "the most electable man in the world" can't even manage to win a primary against the Romneybot, a man who was run out of the senate on a rail over a decade ago, and Rick F'n Santorum.
 
2012-05-27 08:35:24 PM  

HeartBurnKid: I'm sure nobody's reading this thread at this point, but this showed up in my Facebook feed, and I literally laughed out loud at it. I just had to share.

[fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net image 640x382]

/yes, "the most electable man in the world" can't even manage to win a primary against the Romneybot, a man who was run out of the senate on a rail over a decade ago, and Rick F'n Santorum.



It was a misprint.

Was supposed to read "DELECTABLE".


/Mmmmmm
//RON PAUL!
///It's what's for dinner
 
2012-05-27 08:54:05 PM  

pmdgrwr: tirob:

Would you have supported it if it meant ten yrs without an end and money we have to borrow, did you forget Vietnam. Yes they voluteered, but they voluteered to defend our country from foreign armies not knee jerk reaction by politicans looking to be tough on terrorist. Yes there were people who joined after 9/11 to go fight, ask those who are dead ask their famlies how they feel now. What about the families who children fathers and mothers are permanently injured never to be able to care for themselves or provide for their families. What about those who will never recover mentally from witnessing the traumas of war. But that is not for you to deal with, it is someone elses problem


I did not forget Vietnam. I lived through it. But nobody from Vietnam ever came here with the backing of the North Vietnamese or Viet Cong and killed three thousand people.

When I initially supported the invasion of Afghanistan I had no idea how long the war would last, and I would not have guessed that it would last this long. As I have never had the power to see into the future, I could not have predicted, and did not predict in 2001, that GW Bush would see fit to invade Iraq, an adventure that I believed then to be and still believe to have been a distraction from the task at hand, which I considered to be the dismantling of al-Qaeda.

I am sure the families you speak of are devastated.

Whatever else has happened in the past ten years, we have not (knock on wood) had a successful mass murder carried out in this country by anyone linked to or paid by al-Qaeda. It's a victory, however small. And I strongly believe that our overthrow of the Taliban's government, the consequent exile from Afghanistan of al-Qaeda, and our continued military support of the current Afghan government, however flawed that government be, has something to do with that. I suppose Ron Paul doesn't see it that way.
 
2012-05-27 08:57:03 PM  
@pmdgrwr: PS: The war in Afghanistan has been a NATO endeavor from the beginning. We haven't "handed it off" to NATO.
 
2012-05-27 09:22:30 PM  

pmdgrwr:
Suck it up lick your wounds


And be prepared to incur more of them, if you have your way?

pmdgrwr: tirob: You seem to have no problem with the killing of tens of thousands of innocent Afganis right


I care about them at least as much as Ron Paul does.

pmdgrwr:
pmdgrwr: tirob: People like you who favored going to Afganistan just got your feelings hurt because of 9/11

That's not a fact. Don't tell me what I think.

Sounds like I am right and your feelings are hurt again

No, you are wrong. I supported the invasion because I did not believe we had any other choice.

pmdgrwr: tirob:
2. Whose side are you on? A free America

I asked you the question because you appeared to me to revel in the idea that the Taliban was teaching the US military a lesson, and your ambiguous answer leads me to believe that I was right.
 
2012-05-27 09:52:01 PM  

tirob: pmdgrwr: tirob:

Would you have supported it if it meant ten yrs without an end and money we have to borrow, did you forget Vietnam. Yes they voluteered, but they voluteered to defend our country from foreign armies not knee jerk reaction by politicans looking to be tough on terrorist. Yes there were people who joined after 9/11 to go fight, ask those who are dead ask their famlies how they feel now. What about the families who children fathers and mothers are permanently injured never to be able to care for themselves or provide for their families. What about those who will never recover mentally from witnessing the traumas of war. But that is not for you to deal with, it is someone elses problem

I did not forget Vietnam. I lived through it. But nobody from Vietnam ever came here with the backing of the North Vietnamese or Viet Cong and killed three thousand people.

Ok I get it if 10 people died, ok no big deal since 3000 die it means war. The same then can be applied to the afagnis, 20k innocent die that is their reason to take up arms and fight back at us. You see the cycle of self perpetutating war, a war that will never be won.

When I initially supported the invasion of Afghanistan I had no idea how long the war would last, and I would not have guessed that it would last this long. As I have never had the power to see into the future, I could not have predicted, and did not predict in 2001, that GW Bush would see fit to invade Iraq, an adventure that I believed then to be and still believe to have been a distraction from the task at hand, which I considered to be the dismantling of al-Qaeda.

I knew Afganistan would be a long drawn out saga ask the Russians and many other invaders, and was against it from the begining. War should not be an answer to our wounds no matter how atrocious the acts that conjure up the ideas are. If you want to point out to Pearl Harbor why do we not just nuke afganistan like we did Japan. Yes we lost lives on 9/11 but look at the many more that were lost in Afganistan and they were probably peaceful people also, but no one really cares because they were poor to begin with. I love our country but we are not the say all, end all of the world. Face it.

I am sure the families you speak of are devastated.

We agree.

Whatever else has happened in the past ten years, we have not (knock on wood) had a successful mass murder carried out in this country by anyone linked to or paid by al-Qaeda. It's a victory, however small. And I strongly believe that our overthrow of the Taliban's government, the consequent exile from Afghanistan of al-Qaeda, and our continued military support of the current Afghan government, however flawed that government be, has something to do with that. I suppose Ron Paul doesn't see it that way.

Prior to 9/11 when had not had a mass murder since Pearl Harbor, what does that mean? What will be the next excuse if it happens again? Did we not search enough people at the airports or have a sufficient no fly list, maybe because Americans have to much freedom and not enough suppression? 9/11 happened because of our involvement in the mid east, not because we are free or what ever excuse is use to explain why it happened.

No I do not see it that way either because killing more people and invading countries is not a solution and does nothing more than foster hatred of the US and give rise to more terrorist, which promotes more war and more death and more hatred. When we left Vietnam they left us alone. As long as we are in the middle east people will try to attack us, and when they do attack us we act like we were innocent for being there to begin with. We would not like China imposing their will on us, we would bomb chinese interest also, so why do we think others like having our will imposed on them.

AMERICA FUK YEA

 
2012-05-27 10:35:48 PM  

pmdgrwr: Ricardo Klement: pmdgrwr: So if a German or a Mexican commits a terroistic act then we invade Germany or Mexico? There are terrorist all around the world do we invade every country? People like you who favored going to Afganistan just got your feelings hurt because of 9/11 and being the simple minded person you are your only response was to send others to war that has gone on for so long and costed so much with still no end in sight, we had to hand it off to nato. Third world thugs with guns from the 80's schooled a high tech military and you are bitter about that too.

People like you thought it would be a short war only a few months because hell what damage could backwards cave dwellers do, right. So much wasted never to be gotten back but that is ok we will just finance it with loans from china, never mind the fact we have to borrow money just to maintain government much less fight wars. But that is ok as long as scary sht my pants terrorist don't hurt you. Stop hiding behind corrupted politicians thinking they will throw you a bone while you support their whims.

Your objection would make sense if the terrorists were Afghani. They weren't. So try again: why did we go into Afghanistan?

I never said those who were responsible for 9/11 were from afganistan, I was just asking. But I can understand your objection. Why did we go, Taliban? Bin Laden? Taliban support for Bin Laden? Training camps? Opium production? Weed production? Muslim exteremist? They hate our freedoms? We were just mad? What about the Suadi financial support? Do not forget that they learned to fly here in the US not Afganistan.


We went because, in the wake of 9/11, we demanded they hand over bin Laden. They refused. In international law, they effectively chose to side with someone who declared war on the US, and that justifies the invasion.
 
2012-05-28 07:31:54 AM  

pmdgrwr: tirob: pmdgrwr: tirob:

Ok I get it if 10 people died, ok no big deal since 3000 die it means war. The same then can be applied to the afagnis, 20k innocent die that is their reason to take up arms and fight back at us. You see the cycle of self perpetutating war, a war that will never be won.

No, you apparently don't get it. Not only were 3000 people killed, the attacks were the third of their kind carried out be al-Qaeda in three years (after the 1998 East African embassy bombings and the 2000 attack on the USS Cole). We therefore had every reason, in late 2001, to expect more of the same, or worse, unless al-Qaeda was dismantled.

Nearly four thousand days have gone by without a successful attack by al-Qaeda here. Every one of those days is a small victory for us and a defeat for them.

pmdgrwr:

I knew Afganistan would be a long drawn out saga ask the Russians and many other invaders, and was against it from the begining. War should not be an answer to our wounds no matter how atrocious the acts that conjure up the ideas are.


The consequences of the war in Afghanistan are bad, no doubt about that. I think that the consequences not going to war there would have been worse, at least for us. See above.

pmdgrwr:
What will be the next excuse if it happens again? Did we not search enough people at the airports or have a sufficient no fly list, maybe because Americans have to much freedom and not enough suppression? 9/11 happened because of our involvement in the mid east, not because we are free or what ever excuse is use to explain why it happened.


I hope that "it" doesn't happen again. If it does, I think we should cross that bridge when we come to it.

9/11 happened because there were people who were angry about our involvement in the mideast, no doubt about that. There are people in East Asia who are angry that we are involved in that part of the world, too. In your opinion, would it be understandable--or even justifiable--that the government in Pyongyang would organize an attack on civilians here because we support South Korea against it with military force?

As long as petroleum remains in demand around the world, people will fight for it, including us. That's why we're involved in the mideast. If you were under the impression that I was some sort of flag waving superpatriot, I hope that last sentence I wrote disabused you of it. When 9/11 happened, my first reaction was to say, "the high price of cheap oil." Bin Laden et al. were upset because, among other things, we had troops in Saudi Arabia and we were preventing Iraq from taking over Kuwait. All because of petroleum. If we want to be less involved in the mideast, we should all get into the habit of riding bicycles.
 
2012-05-28 07:35:30 AM  
...carried out *by* al-Qaeda...

/faith and begorrah
 
2012-05-29 12:43:44 AM  

pmdgrwr: Let me ask this did you favor military occupation of Afganistan before 9/11?


I was labeled a terrorist sympathizer for not supporting the occupation after 9/11
There is never a case for military occupation

When before 9/11 they found Osama to be responsible for the embassy attacks, GW Bush should have sent a small force to capture him for trial.

America is supposed to be a country of laws, after 9/11 it showed itself to be a country of vengeful childish idiots who can't control their emotions.

pmdgrwr: Did you favor bailing out banks and financial institutions before the economic collapse?


Capitalism only works when you allow corporations to fail. The people should have been bailed out, not mega corporations who made bad bets and used fraud.
 
2012-05-29 12:45:04 AM  

Ricardo Klement: We went because, in the wake of 9/11, we demanded they hand over bin Laden. They refused. In international law, they effectively chose to side with someone who declared war on the US, and that justifies the invasion.



That's wrong. It's not that they refused, it's that they had no way of "turning him in"

If Pakistan couldn't control its border region, and still can't today, how could the formerly American supported Taliban?

the correct action should have been to go in, get Osama and leave.
 
2012-05-29 12:45:54 AM  

tirob: @pmdgrwr: PS: The war in Afghanistan has been a NATO endeavor from the beginning. We haven't "handed it off" to NATO.



America is NATO and NATO is America.
 
2012-05-29 12:46:39 AM  

o5iiawah: citationplease.jpg


85% of white males voted for Bush
 
2012-05-29 01:11:05 AM  

intelligent comment below: pmdgrwr: Let me ask this did you favor military occupation of Afganistan before 9/11?

I was labeled a terrorist sympathizer for not supporting the occupation after 9/11
There is never a case for military occupation

When before 9/11 they found Osama to be responsible for the embassy attacks, GW Bush should have sent a small force to capture him for trial.

America is supposed to be a country of laws, after 9/11 it showed itself to be a country of vengeful childish idiots who can't control their emotions.

pmdgrwr: Did you favor bailing out banks and financial institutions before the economic collapse?

Capitalism only works when you allow corporations to fail. The people should have been bailed out, not mega corporations who made bad bets and used fraud.


Hey wow we agree on something............
 
2012-05-29 01:57:09 AM  

tirob: pmdgrwr: tirob: pmdgrwr: tirob:

Ok I get it if 10 people died, ok no big deal since 3000 die it means war. The same then can be applied to the afagnis, 20k innocent die that is their reason to take up arms and fight back at us. You see the cycle of self perpetutating war, a war that will never be won.

No, you apparently don't get it. Not only were 3000 people killed, the attacks were the third of their kind carried out be al-Qaeda in three years (after the 1998 East African embassy bombings and the 2000 attack on the USS Cole).(since you mentioned war for oil are you sure you do not want to add failed oil dealings with the Taliban) We therefore had every reason, in late 2001, to expect more of the same, or worse, unless al-Qaeda was dismantled.

Dismantled? Really they are growing because we keep fighting and they will continue to grow and we will keep fighting like I said " a war that will not be won". You seem to think this will come to an end.

Nearly four thousand days have gone by without a successful attack by al-Qaeda here. Every one of those days is a small victory for us and a defeat for them.


pmdgrwr:

I knew Afganistan would be a long drawn out saga ask the Russians and many other invaders, and was against it from the begining. War should not be an answer to our wounds no matter how atrocious the acts that conjure up the ideas are.

The consequences of the war in Afghanistan are bad, no doubt about that. I think that the consequences not going to war there would have been worse, at least for us. See above.

There was no way without war we could have a TSA, DHS, militarized police forces, Vipers Squads, and what ever else we have for security. Those program are not war but security measures. It is called protecting the homeland and in the eyes of folks very effective programs. The consequences of war far out way those without war. But for most people we rarely think things through.

pmdgrwr:
What will be the next excuse if it happens again? Did we not search enough people at the airports or have a sufficient no fly list, maybe because Americans have to much freedom and not enough suppression? 9/11 happened because of our involvement in the mid east, not because we are free or what ever excuse is use to explain why it happened.

I hope that "it" doesn't happen again. If it does, I think we should cross that bridge when we come to it.

9/11 happened because there were people who were angry about our involvement in the mideast, no doubt about that. There are people in East Asia who are angry that we are involved in that part of the world, too. In your opinion, would it be understandable--or even justifiable--that the governme ...


So it is all about oil..... You sound like one of those anti war folks. Its for the oil..........
 
2012-05-29 02:19:18 AM  
tirob: In your opinion, would it be understandable--or even justifiable--that the government in Pyongyang would organize an attack on civilians here because we support South Korea against it with military force?

Unfortunatly yes, what fairy tale land do you live in? It must suck to have your own foreign policy used against you. You seem to think that policing the world and wars are free gifts and excellent ROI. But don't worry about North Korea and al queda, China's rising power will soon draw the attention away from the dying nation the US will soon become because of war. War so Exxon can have bigger profits, so you do not have to ride a bike, so politicans could save face in the aftermath of 9/11. You want to talk about consequences.......
 
2012-05-29 06:14:14 AM  

pmdgrwr: tirob:

Dismantled? Really they are growing because we keep fighting and they will continue to grow and we will keep fighting like I said " a war that will not be won". You seem to think this will come to an end.

I don't think al-Qaeda can be eliminated. I think they can be kept off balance if our experience in the past ten years is any indication. And I hope that the President is telling the truth when he says that we can safely recall our troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2014.

Al-Qaeda will probably continue to exist if we fight them. It will definitely continue to exist--and will grow--if we don't fight them.

pmdgrwr:
There was no way without war we could have a TSA, DHS, militarized police forces, Vipers Squads, and what ever else we have for security. Those program are not war but security measures. It is called protecting the homeland and in the eyes of folks very effective programs. The consequences of war far out way those without war.

I don't like the increased security in airports, train stations, etc., since 2001 any more than you do. But I would put at least some of the blame for its existence on the people who hijacked those planes eleven years ago.

pmdgrwr:
So it is all about oil

Yes. I think we need to face the facts. All of us who live in this country depend on petroleum, and if the oil supply from the Persian Gulf area were cut off--or dominated by one person--we would see the price of oil around the world go up. As a consequence, the price of just about everything here would go up, too. Substantially. All of this is the basis for our continuing military involvement in that part of the world.

I don't know too much about the Bush administration's dealings with the Taliban, but I'll take your word that they happened. I would guess that one among many reasons for this démarche would have been the idea that we might be able to wean the Taliban from their al-Qaeda supporters, protectors, and patrons. It didn't work, obviously.

pmdgrwr: tirob: In your opinion, would it be understandable--or even justifiable--that the government in Pyongyang would organize an attack on civilians here because we support South Korea against it with military force?

Unfortunatly yes, what fairy tale land do you live in?


I believe the name of this place is Pennsylvania. And even Pyongyang has refrained so far from taking such a step, proving in my mind at least that the people who run the government there have more sense than you do.

pmdgrwr: tirob: War so Exxon can have bigger profits, so you we do not have to ride a bike, so politicans could save face in the aftermath of 9/11.


FTFY. Exxon's out for itself, no doubt about that, and they're not without influence in Washington. But another major reason for the war in Afghanistan was to try to prevent more attacks on civilians here. And whatever else has happened since 9/11, we've been lucky in that respect, and I think that our invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, and the chasing of al-Qaeda from that country, has something to do with our "luck."
 
2012-05-29 06:21:15 AM  

intelligent comment below: Ricardo Klement: We went because, in the wake of 9/11, we demanded they hand over bin Laden. They refused. In international law, they effectively chose to side with someone who declared war on the US, and that justifies the invasion.


That's wrong. It's not that they refused, it's that they had no way of "turning him in"

If Pakistan couldn't control its border region, and still can't today, how could the formerly American supported Taliban?

the correct action should have been to go in, get Osama and leave.


They wouldn't give us access to try ourselves, either.

But I concur with what we should have done.
 
2012-05-29 06:39:53 AM  

intelligent comment below: tirob: @pmdgrwr: PS: The war in Afghanistan has been a NATO endeavor from the beginning. We haven't "handed it off" to NATO.

America is NATO and NATO is America.


My point was that we have been fighting this war with allies, notably Britain and Canada, since it started.

intelligent comment below:

America is supposed to be a country of laws, after 9/11 it showed itself to be a country of vengeful childish idiots who can't control their emotions.

We get angry when people here are killed. We're not much different from anyone else in this respect as in most others.
 
Displayed 37 of 187 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report